Clinical and translational radiation oncology · 2026
Concurrent versus sequential immune checkpoint inhibition in the neoadjuvant treatment of resectable esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
СтатьяОбзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Ghalehtaki Reza, Shariati Alireza, Fanihagh Taher, Moradi Zahra, Moradi Niloofar
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are increasingly integrated into the neoadjuvant treatment of resectable esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC), yet the optimal timing of ICI administration remains undefined. We conducted the first systematic review and meta-analysis directly comparing these two strategies.
METHODS: PubMed, Embase, and Scopus were searched from inception through April 2026. Prospective studies enrolling adult patients with non-metastatic resectable ESCC who received neoadjuvant ICI alongside chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy were eligible. Pooled pathological complete response (pCR) and major pathological response (MPR) were analyzed using random-effects models.
RESULTS: Fifty-three prospective studies (2937 patients) were included. In the primary analysis, consolidation ICI was associated with significantly higher pCR than concurrent ICI (48% vs. 31%; p = 0.0005). However, when restricted to studies using chemoradiotherapy in both arms, this difference lost statistical significance (48% vs. 41%; p = 0.18), suggesting the initial advantage was largely attributable to a greater use of chemoradiotherapy in the sequential subgroup rather than ICI timing per se. A parallel pattern was observed for MPR.
CONCLUSIONS: When matched for treatment backbone, concurrent and consolidation ICI timing produce comparable pathological response rates in resectable ESCC. Randomized trials with pre-specified timing arms and biomarker stratification are warranted.
METHODS: PubMed, Embase, and Scopus were searched from inception through April 2026. Prospective studies enrolling adult patients with non-metastatic resectable ESCC who received neoadjuvant ICI alongside chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy were eligible. Pooled pathological complete response (pCR) and major pathological response (MPR) were analyzed using random-effects models.
RESULTS: Fifty-three prospective studies (2937 patients) were included. In the primary analysis, consolidation ICI was associated with significantly higher pCR than concurrent ICI (48% vs. 31%; p = 0.0005). However, when restricted to studies using chemoradiotherapy in both arms, this difference lost statistical significance (48% vs. 41%; p = 0.18), suggesting the initial advantage was largely attributable to a greater use of chemoradiotherapy in the sequential subgroup rather than ICI timing per se. A parallel pattern was observed for MPR.
CONCLUSIONS: When matched for treatment backbone, concurrent and consolidation ICI timing produce comparable pathological response rates in resectable ESCC. Randomized trials with pre-specified timing arms and biomarker stratification are warranted.