Key PointsQuestion听
Do patients with resectable non鈥搒mall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and tumor programmed cell death 1 ligand 1 (PD-L1) levels less than 1% benefit from neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy?
Findings听
In this meta-analysis of 43 studies involving 5431 patients with resectable NSCLC, there was a significant benefit in event-free survival (hazard ratio, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.62-0.89; I2鈥�=鈥�0%) but not overall survival for patients with baseline tumor PD-L1 levels less than 1% who received neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy compared with chemotherapy.
Meaning听
This study found that neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy was superior to neoadjuvant chemotherapy across surgical, pathological, and efficacy outcomes and patients with resectable NSCLC and tumor PD-L1 levels less than 1% had an event-free survival benefit with neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy.
Importance听
To date, no meta-analyses have comprehensively assessed the association of neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy with clinical outcomes in non鈥搒mall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in randomized and nonrandomized settings. In addition, there exists controversy concerning the efficacy of neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy for patients with NSCLC with programmed cell death 1 ligand 1 (PD-L1) levels less than 1%.
Objective听
To compare neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy with chemotherapy by adverse events and surgical, pathological, and efficacy outcomes using recently published randomized clinical trials and nonrandomized trials.
Data Sources听
MEDLINE and Embase were systematically searched from January 1, 2013, to October 25, 2023, for all clinical trials of neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy and chemotherapy that included at least 10 patients.
Study Selection听
Observational studies and trials reporting the use of neoadjuvant radiotherapy, including chemoradiotherapy, molecular targeted therapy, or immunotherapy monotherapy, were excluded.
Main Outcomes and Measures听
Surgical, pathological, and efficacy end points and adverse events were pooled using a random-effects meta-analysis.
Results听
Among 43 eligible trials comprising 5431 patients (4020 males [74.0%]; median age range, 55-70 years), there were 8 randomized clinical trials with 3387 patients. For randomized clinical trials, pooled overall survival (hazard ratio, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.54-0.79; I2鈥�=鈥�0%), event-free survival (hazard ratio, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.52-0.67; I2鈥�=鈥�14.9%), major pathological response (risk ratio, 3.42; 95% CI, 2.83-4.15; I2鈥�=鈥�31.2%), and complete pathological response (risk ratio, 5.52; 95% CI, 4.25-7.15; I2鈥�=鈥�27.4%) favored neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy over neoadjuvant chemotherapy. For patients with baseline tumor PD-L1 levels less than 1%, there was a significant benefit in event-free survival for neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy compared with chemotherapy (hazard ratio, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.62-0.89; I2鈥�=鈥�0%).
Conclusion and Relevance听
This study found that neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy was superior to neoadjuvant chemotherapy across surgical, pathological, and efficacy outcomes. These findings suggest that patients with resectable NSCLC with tumor PD-L1 levels less than 1% may have an event-free survival benefit with neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy.
Lung cancer remains the leading cause of cancer death worldwide.1 Non鈥搒mall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) accounts for 80% to 85% of all lung cancers and is associated with poor outcomes owing to advanced disease at diagnosis.2 Surgery remains the main treatment modality for early-stage NSCLC, but only one-quarter of patients have resectable disease at diagnosis and approximately 30% to 55% of patients will have a recurrence after surgery.3-5 Recently, several clinical trials have been initiated to assess the efficacy of treatment in the neoadjuvant setting. Neoadjuvant treatment can target micrometastatic disease prior to surgery and can downstage cancer, permitting resection that was previously not possible or considered too extensive.6,7 Potential drawbacks of this approach include progression on neoadjuvant therapy, thus precluding surgery, and possible effects on surgical performance.
In 2022, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved neoadjuvant nivolumab with platinum-doublet chemotherapy for patients with resectable NSCLC based on results of the Phase III CheckMate 816 trial.8 This approval led to a recommendation by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network for neoadjuvant nivolumab with platinum-doublet chemotherapy in patients with stage IB to IIIA or IIIB (only T3, N2) NSCLC.9 In 2023, the FDA approved neoadjuvant pembrolizumab in combination with platinum-containing chemotherapy for resectable NSCLC followed by single-agent pembrolizumab in the adjuvant setting across all programmed cell death 1 ligand 1 (PD-L1) strata after overall survival (OS) results were produced from KEYNOTE-671.10,11 In contrast, the European Medicines Agency approved nivolumab in combination with platinum-based chemotherapy in the neoadjuvant setting only in patients at high risk of recurrence and with tumor cell PD-L1 expression levels greater than 1%. This was based on an analysis showing no difference in event-free survival (EFS) between neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy and chemotherapy in patients with PD-L1 levels less than 1% in CheckMate 816, with a decision still pending regarding results of KEYNOTE-671. These conflicting approvals highlight the uncertainty concerning the efficacy of neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy in subgroups of patients and demonstrate the need for a meta-analysis across all published neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy trials.
Existing meta-analyses of nonrandomized clinical trials have described inconsistent results when comparing neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy trials with studies assessing other neoadjuvant treatment regimens.12,13 This highlights that the inclusion of single-arm studies results in indirect comparisons that are prone to high levels of bias due to interstudy heterogeneity in stage, sex, age, and histology. Finally, recent randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy are not captured by existing systematic reviews. Thus, we sought to compare neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy and neoadjuvant chemotherapy in a larger number of patients through a meta-analysis of RCTs and non-RCTs by assessing surgical, pathological, and efficacy outcomes, as well as treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) and surgical adverse events (SRAEs). We also describe the performance of neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy in specific subgroups of patients derived from RCTs to inform future neoadjuvant drug approvals.
This systematic review and meta-analysis followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses () reporting guideline.14 The protocol of this study was registered with PROSPERO ().
Search Strategy and Selection Criteria
Due to the evolution of surgical and staging modalities, as well as an existing landmark meta-analysis on neoadjuvant chemotherapy,15 we decided to include studies published from 2013 onward. MEDLINE and Embase databases were searched from January 1, 2013, to the present (search last updated October 25, 2023) with no language restriction for published single-arm trials and RCTs pertaining to neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy, chemotherapy, or both treatments in patients with resectable lung cancer. The complete search strategy can be found in eTables 1 and 2 in Supplement 1. Only published articles reporting trial-level data related to neoadjuvant chemotherapy or neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy were included. Abstracts, conference proceedings, retrospective studies, editorials, comments, gray literature, and all other publication types without trial-level evidence were excluded. Clinical trials reporting the use of radiotherapy, including neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, molecular targeted therapy, or immunotherapy monotherapy, were excluded. Only studies with adult patients were included. Studies that included only patients with NSCLC with EGFR variants or studies that did not use TNM staging were excluded. All articles were screened for relevance by title and abstract by 2 independent reviewers (M.S. and C.P., L.G., K.N., K.K., M.H.S., L-.R.D., A.A., or A.S.). Relevant articles were then read fully to determine eligibility for inclusion, once again by 2 independent reviewers (M.S. and C.P., L.G., K.N., K.K., M.H.S., L-.R.D., A.A., or A.S.). In all cases, disagreements were resolved by a third reviewer (M.D.). In addition, abstracts from the 2023 American Society of Clinical Oncology conference, European Society for Medical Oncology conference, European Lung Cancer Congress, World Conference on Lung Cancer, and American Association for Cancer Research conference were screened for updates on published RCTs and for results on new RCTs. The most updated online data were included, and online material from conference websites was also used.
Risk of bias was assessed by 2 independent reviewers (M.S. and K.N.) using the revised Cochrane risk of bias tool16,17 for RCTs and the Joanna Briggs Institute checklist for single-arm studies. Disagreements were resolved by a third reviewer (M.D.).
Relevant data were extracted independently by 2 researchers (M.S. and C.P., L.G., K.N., K.K., M.H.S., L-.R.D., A.A., or A.S.) from included articles using a prespecified form. Discrepancies were discussed with a third reviewer (M.D.) and were resolved through consensus. Extracted data included surgical, pathological, and efficacy outcomes, as well as adverse events (eMethods in Supplement 1). For RCTs, hazard ratios (HRs) for EFS and OS and their 95% CIs were also extracted from each included study. When available, HRs by subgroup stratified by sex, age, histology, PD-L1 level, stage, and type of platinum agent received (carboplatin vs cisplatin) were also extracted. All single arms were extracted if they met inclusion criteria. Only studies that reported the outcome of interest were included in the relevant analysis.
Outcomes of interest included surgical (surgical resection rate and R0 resection), pathological (major pathological response [MPR] and complete pathological response [pCR]), and efficacy (EFS and OS) outcomes, as well as adverse events (SRAEs and TRAEs) (eMethods in Supplement 1). We performed analyses using metafor18 and meta19 packages in R statistical software version 3.4.0 (R Project for Statistical Computing).
Outcome data from single-arm studies were pooled independently for neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy and chemotherapy by an inverse variance random-effects meta-analysis using logit transformation. Pooled proportion estimates were compared between chemotherapy and chemoimmunotherapy by univariate metaregression.20 For single-arm studies, the incidence of death was calculated using the number of death events and the median follow-up time, with a comparison done by subgroup analysis. For RCT data, we performed a restricted maximum likelihood meta-analysis of risk ratios (RRs) and HRs for time-dependent data. Subgroup analyses were exploratory. For each analysis, we included the 95% CIs, I2 statistic, 蟿2 statistic, and 蠂2. All tests were 2-sided, and a P value鈥�<鈥�.05 was considered significant unless otherwise indicated.
Our search returned 642 total and 602 unique results. After title and abstract screening, 519 studies were excluded, and an additional 41 studies were removed after full-text screening. A total of 42 publications8,10,21-60 and 6 abstracts11,61-65 met inclusion criteria, including 43 trials8,10,21-27,29-35,37-63 and 5 follow-up studies,11,28,36,64,65 from which we extracted 54 study arms; 5431 patients were included overall in the 43 trials (4020 males [74.0%]; median age range, 55-70 years) (Table; eTable 3 and eFigure 1 in Supplement 1). There were 8 RCTs comparing neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy with chemotherapy, namely CheckMate 816,8,64-66 KEYNOTE-671,10,11,67 NADIM II,21 AEGEAN,41 Neotorch,63,68 Checkmate 77T,61,69 TD-FOREKNOW,23 and RATIONALE 31562,70 (Table). Across 3387 patients (2582 males [76.2%]; median age range, 61-66 years) included in 8 RCTs,8,10,11,21,23,41,61-70 there were 1688 patients (49.8%) treated with chemotherapy, 1699 patients (50.2%) treated with chemoimmunotherapy, 1882 patients (55.6%) who had squamous histology, and 2443 patients (72.1%) who had stage III disease. Across all studies, there were 27 neoadjuvant chemotherapy8,10,11,21-24,26,31,33,35-39,41-47,50-52,59,61-70 and 27 neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy8,10,11,21,23,25,27-30,32,34,40,41,48,49,53-58,60-70 arms; 21 arms21-37,49,50,63,68 included only patients with stage III disease. Studies ranged from 10 patients33 to 400 patients10 per arm, and there were 2347 patients assigned to neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy and 3084 patients assigned to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. With regard to histology, 2767 patients had squamous cell carcinoma, with the remaining patients having nonsquamous histologies. For neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy studies,8,10,11,21,23,25,27-30,32,34,40,41,48,49,53-58,60-70 there were 533 patients treated with nivolumab, 434 patients treated with pembrolizumab, 433 patients treated with durvalumab, 381 patients treated with toripalimab, 226 patients treated with tislelizumab, 169 patients treated with sintilimab, 46 patients treated with ipilimumab, 43 patients treated with camrelizumab, 37 patients treated with adebrelimab, 30 patients treated with atezolizumab, and 15 patients treated with avelumab. For 11 studies,8,10,11,21,23,29,38,39,41,61-70 more than a single arm was extracted per study. For 4 studies,8,10,27,35 a follow-up study11,28,36,64-67 was found (2 were found for CheckMate 816), and the updated data were used instead of the original data.
Overall, there was a low risk of bias among RCTs, with bias arising due to unbalanced treatment arms in 1 study23 and potentially multiple analyses of the same data in another study41 (eFigure 2 in Supplement 1). For nonrandomized studies,22,24-40,42-60 bias concerns were mostly associated with inadequate length of follow-up (eTable 4 in Supplement 1).
Across RCTs, the pooled OS favored neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy (HR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.54-0.79; I2鈥�=鈥�0%) over neoadjuvant chemotherapy (Figure 1; eTable 5 in Supplement 1).8,10,11,21,23,41,61-70 While there was an improvement in OS for patients treated with neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy vs neoadjuvant chemotherapy among patients with tumor PD-L1 levels of 1% or greater (HR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.33-0.73; I2鈥�=鈥�48.5%) and patients with stage III cancer (HR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.53-0.85; I2鈥�=鈥�0%), this was not seen for patients with tumor PD-L1 levels less than 1% (HR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.66-1.19; I2鈥�=鈥�0%) (Figure 1). The pooled EFS estimate across all patients in RCTs favored neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy over neoadjuvant chemotherapy (HR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.52-0.67; I2鈥�=鈥�14.9%) (Figure 2; eTable 6 in Supplement 1).8,10,11,21,23,41,61-70 For individual subgroups, we found an improvement in EFS for neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy over neoadjuvant chemotherapy across patients treated in Europe (HR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.50-0.83; I2鈥�=鈥�0%) and Asia (HR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.41-0.63; I2鈥�=鈥�8.2%) but not North America (HR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.43-1.10; I2鈥�=鈥�0%) (eFigure 3 in Supplement 1). There was also an improvement with neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy vs neoadjuvant chemotherapy for patients aged younger than 65 years and 65 years or older (eFigure 4 in Supplement 1), females and males (eFigure 5 in Supplement 1), patients with squamous and nonsquamous histologies (eFigure 6 in Supplement 1). A significant improvement in EFS with neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy vs neoadjuvant chemotherapy was seen for patients with stage II (HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.55-0.92; I2鈥�=鈥�0%) and stage III (HR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.48-0.62; I2鈥�=鈥�0%) cancer (Figure 2). For patients with baseline tumor PD-L1 levels less than 1%, the pooled outcome favored neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy (HR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.62-0.89; I2鈥�=鈥�0%) (Figure 2). There was significant improvement for patients with PD-L1 levels of 1% to 49% (HR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.42-0.73; I2鈥�=鈥�41.3%) and 50% or greater (HR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.28-0.56; I2鈥�=鈥�32.1%) (Figure 2). By type of platinum therapy used, there was an EFS benefit for patients treated with cisplatin and carboplatin in the neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy group (eFigure 7 in Supplement 1). There was an improvement across all subgroups for MPR and pCR with neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy vs neoadjuvant chemotherapy (eFigures 8-9 in Supplement 1), with the exception of MPR for patients treated in North America.
For RCT pathological end points, the relative risk for MPR (RR, 3.42; 95% CI, 2.83-4.15; I2鈥�=鈥�31.2%), and pCR (RR, 5.52; 95% CI, 4.25-7.15; I2鈥�=鈥�27.4%) was significantly increased for neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy vs neoadjuvant chemotherapy (Figure 3).8,10,11,21,23,41,61-70 There was an increased relative risk of undergoing surgery (RR, 1.05; 95% CI, 1.02-1.09; I2鈥�=鈥�31.8%) (Figure 4)8,10,11,21,23,41,61-70 and lobectomy (RR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.01-1.13; I2鈥�=鈥�42.4%) for neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy compared with chemotherapy in RCTs (eFigure 10 in Supplement 1). There was no significant difference between neoadjuvant chemotherapy and neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy in the relative risk of receiving all cycles of neoadjuvant therapy, pneumonectomy, or bilobectomy or having surgical delay or open surgery (eFigures 11-15 in Supplement 1). However, patients treated with neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy were more likely to undergo R0 resection (RR, 1.05; 95% CI, 1.02-1.08; I2鈥�=鈥�0%) (Figure 4). The proportion of patients in RCTs who were not resected in chemoimmunotherapy arms ranged from 4 of 57 patients (7.0%)21 to 51 of 229 patients (22.3%).61,69 Among these patients, the reason precluding surgery was patient refusal in 1 of 57 patients (1.0%)21 to 18 of 202 patients (8.9%)63,68 and progression on therapy for 0 of 57 patients21 to 27 of 366 patients (7.4%),41 among other reasons (eTable 7 in Supplement 1).
There were no significant differences in the relative risk for grade 3 to 4, grade 5, or total TRAEs or SRAEs among patients receiving neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy vs neoadjuvant chemotherapy in RCTs (eFigures 16-21 in Supplement 1). Among complications preventing surgery (eTable 7 in Supplement 1), there was a reduced risk of not undergoing surgery (RR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.70-0.94; I2鈥�=鈥�40.5%) (eFigure 22 in Supplement 1) and progression precluding surgery (RR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.33-0.79; I2鈥�=鈥�49.0%) (eFigure 23 in Supplement 1), an increased risk of adverse events (RR, 2.16; 95% CI, 1.15-4.06; I2鈥�=鈥�0%) (eFigure 24 in Supplement 1), and no difference in risk of patient refusal (RR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.58-1.05; I2鈥�=鈥�0%) (eFigure 25 in Supplement 1) or other reasons precluding surgery (RR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.54-1.23; I2鈥�=鈥�16.5%) for the neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy vs neoadjuvant chemotherapy arm (eFigure 26 in Supplement 1).
We also compared these clinical variables across all trials, including RCTs and nonrandomized single-arm trials.8,10,11,21-70 For single-arm studies,8,10,11,21-70 there was also a significantly higher MPR and pCR for chemoimmunotherapy than chemotherapy (eFigures 27-28 in Supplement 1). There was no significant difference in the pooled prevalence of patients who had a complete response or progressive disease, but there was an increase in the proportion of patients with a partial response or stable disease for chemoimmunotherapy vs chemotherapy (eFigures 29-32 in Supplement 1).
For single-arm studies,8,10,11,21-70 no trend was observed for surgical resection (eFigure 33 in Supplement 1). There was a significant increase in the prevalence of R0 resections (eFigure 34 in Supplement 1) and lobectomies (eFigure 35 in Supplement 1) and a decrease in pneumonectomies for chemoimmunotherapy vs chemotherapy (eFigure 36 in the Supplement). No differences were found for the incidence of death between for chemoimmunotherapy vs chemotherapy (eFigure 37 in the Supplement).
To our knowledge, this is the most comprehensive meta-analysis to date comparing neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy and chemotherapy using RCT data. Overall, we found that neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy was associated with improved OS, EFS, MPR, and pCR compared with neoadjuvant chemotherapy; in addition, chemoimmunotherapy was associated with improved resectability and an increased rate of R0 resections, with a similar rate of adverse events.
Our meta-analysis showed an improvement in EFS with neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy over neoadjuvant chemotherapy across age (鈮�65 and <65 years), sex (male and female), and histology (squamous and nonsquamous cancer) groups. There was an improvement for patients with stage II and stage III disease. Chemoimmunotherapy was associated with a benefit in EFS for all 3 categories for PD-L1 level (<1%, 1%-49%, and 鈮�50%), although the OS benefit was restricted to the subgroup with a PD-L1 level of 鈥�1% or greater based on the current maturity of OS data. This highlights that the restriction in the approval of neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy exclusively for patients with a PD-L1 level of 1% or greater by the European Medicines Agency was based on a subgroup analysis from a single trial (CheckMate 816)8 and that the available evidence now suggests that this patient population may have an EFS benefit with neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy. It will be important to assess whether this translates into an OS benefit as the number of studies reporting OS and the follow-up time for these studies increase.
A major concern of the neoadjuvant approach is progression on therapy preventing surgery.71 We found that neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy was associated with a reduced risk of not undergoing surgery compared with chemotherapy alone owing to a reduced risk of progression precluding surgery; however, there was an increased risk in adverse events precluding surgery. Across all RCTs,8,10,11,21,23,41,61-70 7.0% to 22.3% of patients were not resected in chemoimmunotherapy arms. Patient refusal was the reason precluding surgery in 1.0% to 8.9% of patients receiving chemoimmunotherapy and progression on therapy for 0% to 7.4% of these patients. While it is possible that patients who progressed on therapy could have benefited from up-front surgery, these patients were likely to develop early metastasis even if resected up front. There remains a clear gap in our understanding of the relative benefits associated with neoadjuvant vs adjuvant strategies for this patient population, although significant challenges exist around the feasibility of trials aimed at resolving this open question. Certainly, neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy may also be associated with downstaging of disease prior to surgery and a reduced extent of resection required for curative surgery, while an adjuvant strategy does not offer such an opportunity.71 Conversely, data in this study on resectability suggest that concerns that neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy may be associated with poor surgical outcomes compared with neoadjuvant chemotherapy may not be relevant. It is worth noting that results from the General Thoracic Surgery Database indicate that 30- and 90-day mortality after neoadjuvant chemotherapy are not different from outcomes of patients undergoing up-front surgery after risk adjustment.72 Ideally, a meta-analysis of surgical outcomes from adjuvant studies compared with those from neoadjuvant studies may help more definitively resolve this important question if a pure neoadjuvant vs adjuvant trial fails to emerge.
This study has several limitations. Meta-analyses of nonrandomized clinical trials are subject to a high level of bias owing to the inherent nature of indirect comparisons, which assume that trial designs and patient populations of individual arms are similar enough to be compared. Our subanalysis of nonrandomized studies may thus also be subject to confounding. However, our meta-analysis also included large RCTs comparing neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy with chemotherapy, which represents an important strength. Other limitations of our study include the variability in definitions for pathological and efficacy end points and differences in follow-up time. Additionally, differences in inclusion criteria may affect outcomes of individual studies, and we are not able to rule out the possibility of multiplicity and a type I error based on the large number of end points tested. Furthermore, studies varied in the number of neoadjuvant cycles, type of immunotherapy drugs (pembrolizumab, nivolumab, or durvalumab) used in combination with chemotherapy, and dose and nature of the adjuvant treatment, which could be associated with EFS and OS. Importantly, the appropriate adjuvant treatment regimen for patients treated with neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy remains controversial, and there is currently limited evidence to suggest the superiority of a perioperative approach compared with a pure neoadjuvant approach. However, all RCTs presented in this study had the commonality of a neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy approach. In terms of number of cycles, the neoSCORE trial40 compared 2 vs 3 cycles of neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy and found that at 12 months, the OS rate was 92.3% in the 2-cycle arm and 86.2% in the 3-cycle arm. These findings potentially suggest that the number of neoadjuvant cycles is associated with outcomes.
This meta-analysis found that neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy was superior to neoadjuvant chemotherapy given that it was associated with improved efficacy (EFS and OS) and pathological (MPR and pCR) outcomes and increased surgical resection rate and R0 resections, without an increase in the rate of SRAEs or TRAEs. In addition, neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy was superior across sex, age, histology, and PD-L1 levels in EFS. This finding has increased importance given the recent restriction by the EMA of neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy to patients with PD-L1 levels of 1% or greater. Future studies should continue to assess the benefit associated with neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy by subgroup as OS matures. In addition, future studies may be able to assess whether the specific type of chemotherapy or immunotherapy is associated with outcomes for patients treated with neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy.
Accepted for Publication: November 3, 2023.
Published Online: March 21, 2024. doi:10.1001/jamaoncol.2024.0057
Open Access: This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the CC-BY License. 漏 2024 Sorin M et al. JAMA Oncology.
Corresponding Author: Jonathan D. Spicer, MD, PhD, Department of Surgery, McGill University, 1650 Cedar Ave, L8, Montreal, QC H3G 1A4, Canada (jonathan.spicer@mcgill.ca).
Author Contributions: Mr Sorin and Dr Spicer had full access to all of the data in the study and take responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis.
Concept and design: Sorin, Prosty, Dankner, Forde, Spicer.
Acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data: All authors.
Drafting of the manuscript: Sorin, Prosty, Ghaleb, Katergi, Shahzad, Atallah, Dankner, Provencio.
Critical review of the manuscript for important intellectual content: Sorin, Prosty, Ghaleb, Nie, Shahzad, Dub茅, Atallah, Swaby, Dankner, Crump, Walsh, Fiset, Sepesi, Forde, Cascone, Provencio, Spicer.
Statistical analysis: Sorin, Prosty, Ghaleb, Nie, Dub茅, Crump, Walsh.
Obtained funding: Spicer.
Administrative, technical, or material support: Prosty, Ghaleb, Katergi, Spicer.
Supervision: Prosty, Walsh, Provencio, Spicer.
Conflict of Interest Disclosures: Dr Fiset reported receiving personal fees from Amgen, Astellas, AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb (BMS), EMD Serono, Incyte, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, and Precision Rx-Dx and grants from AstraZeneca, BMS, Merck, and Pfizer outside the submitted work. Dr Sepesi reported receiving personal fees from BMS, AstraZeneca, PeerView, and Medscape outside the submitted work. Dr Forde reported receiving grants from AstraZeneca, BMS, Biontech, Novartis Biontech, and Regeneron and personal fees from Ascendis, AstraZeneca, BMS, Curevac, Novartis, Regeneron, G1, Genelux, Genentech, Gritstone, Merck, Janssen, F Star, Sanofi, Amgen, Fosun, Teva, Synthekine, Flame, Iteos, Tavotek, and Teva during the conduct of the study. Dr Cascone reported receiving personal fees from AstraZeneca, BMS, Arrowhead Pharmaceuticals, Clinical Care Options, IDEOlogy Health, the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer, the Mark Foundation for Cancer Research, Roche, Medscape, OncLive, PeerView, Physicians' Education Resource, Genentech, Merck, Pfizer, Regeneron, Dava Oncology, the European Society for Medical Oncology, and the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer and grants from AstraZeneca and BMS outside the submitted work. Dr Provencio reported receiving grants from BMS, MSD, Amgen, and Takeda and personal fees from Roche and AstraZeneca outside the submitted work. Dr Spicer reported receiving personal fees from AstraZeneca, Merck, BMS, Roche, Amgen, Protalix Biotherapeutics, Xenetic Biosciences, Regeneron, and Eisai and grants from AstraZeneca, Merck, BMS, Roche, Protalix Biotherapeutics, and Regeneron during the conduct of the study. No other disclosures were reported.
Data Sharing Statement: See Supplement 2.
Additional Contributions: The authors thank Alessia Nicole Paparella, MISt (McGill University Health Centre, research librarian), for her assistance with the search strategy. This individual was not compensated for this work.
1.Sung
听H锘�, Ferlay
听J锘�, Siegel
听RL锘�,
听et al. 听Global cancer statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries.听锘� 听CA Cancer J Clin. 2021;71(3):209-249. doi:锘�
2.Duma
听N锘�, Santana-Davila
听R锘�, Molina
听JR锘�. 听Non-small cell lung cancer: epidemiology, screening, diagnosis, and treatment.听锘� 听Mayo Clin Proc. 2019;94(8):1623-1640. doi:锘�
3.Kelsey
听CR锘�, Marks
听LB锘�, Hollis
听D锘�,
听et al. 听Local recurrence after surgery for early stage lung cancer: an 11-year experience with 975 patients.听锘� 听颁补苍肠别谤. 2009;115(22):5218-5227. doi:锘�
4.Endo
听C锘�, Sakurada
听A锘�, Notsuda
听H锘�,
听et al. 听Results of long-term follow-up of patients with completely resected non-small cell lung cancer.听锘� 听Ann Thorac Surg. 2012;93(4):1061-1068. doi:锘�
5.Gourcerol
听D锘�, Scherpereel
听A锘�, Debeugny
听S锘�, Porte
听H锘�, Cortot
听AB锘�, Lafitte
听JJ锘�. 听Relevance of an extensive follow-up after surgery for nonsmall cell lung cancer.听锘� 听Eur Respir J. 2013;42(5):1357-1364. doi:锘�
6.Chaft
听JE锘�, Rimner
听A锘�, Weder
听W锘�, Azzoli
听CG锘�, Kris
听MG锘�, Cascone
听T锘�. 听Evolution of systemic therapy for stages I-III non-metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer.听锘� 听Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2021;18(9):547-557. doi:锘�
7.Huynh
听C锘�, Sorin
听M锘�, Rayes
听R锘�, Fiset
听PO锘�, Walsh
听LA锘�, Spicer
听JD锘�. 听Pathological complete response as a surrogate endpoint after neoadjuvant therapy for lung cancer.听锘� 听尝补苍肠别迟 Oncol. 2021;22(8):1056-1058. doi:锘�
8.Forde
听PM锘�, Spicer
听J锘�, Lu
听S锘�,
听et al; CheckMate 816 Investigators. 听Neoadjuvant nivolumab plus chemotherapy in resectable lung cancer.听锘� 听N Engl J Med. 2022;386(21):1973-1985. doi:锘�
9.Ettinger
听DS锘�, Wood
听DE锘�, Aisner
听DL锘�,
听et al. 听NCCN guidelines insights: non-small cell lung cancer, version 2.2023.听锘� 听J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2023;21(4):340-350. doi:锘�
10.Wakelee
听H锘�, Liberman
听M锘�, Kato
听T锘�,
听et al; KEYNOTE-671 Investigators. 听Perioperative pembrolizumab for early-stage non-small-cell lung cancer.听锘� 听N Engl J Med. 2023;389(6):491-503. doi:锘�
11.Spicer
听JD锘�, Gao
听S锘�, Liberman
听M锘�,
听et al. 听LBA56 Overall survival in the KEYNOTE-671 study of perioperative pembrolizumab for early-stage non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC).听锘� 听Ann Oncol. 2023;34(Suppl 2):S1297-S1298. doi:
12.Jiang
听J锘�, Wang
听Y锘�, Gao
听Y锘�,
听et al. 听Neoadjuvant immunotherapy or chemoimmunotherapy in non-small cell lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.听锘� 听Transl Lung Cancer Res. 2022;11(2):277-294. doi:锘�
13.Ge
听S锘�, Huang
听C锘�. 听Immune checkpoint inhibitors in neoadjuvant therapy of non-small cell lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.听锘� 听J Thorac Dis. 2022;14(2):333-342. doi:锘�
14.Haddaway
听NR锘�, Page
听MJ锘�, Pritchard
听CC锘�, McGuinness
听LA锘�. 听PRISMA2020: An R package and Shiny app for producing PRISMA 2020-compliant flow diagrams, with interactivity for optimised digital transparency and Open Synthesis.听锘� 听Campbell Syst Rev. 2022;18(2):e1230. doi:锘�
15.NSCLC Meta-analysis Collaborative Group. 听Preoperative chemotherapy for non-small-cell lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of individual participant data.听锘� 听尝补苍肠别迟. 2014;383(9928):1561-1571. doi:锘�
16.McGuinness
听LA锘�, Higgins
听JPT锘�. 听Risk-of-bias visualization (robvis): an R package and Shiny web app for visualizing risk-of-bias assessments.听锘� 听Res Synth Methods. 2021;12(1):55-61. doi:锘�
17.Sterne
听JAC锘�, Savovi膰
听J锘�, Page
听MJ锘�,
听et al. 听RoB 2: a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials.听锘� 听叠惭闯. 2019;366:l4898. doi:锘�
18.Viechtbauer
听W.锘匡豢 听Conducting meta-analyses in R with the metafor package.听锘� 听J Stat Softw. 2010;36(3):1-48. doi:
19.Balduzzi
听S锘�, R眉cker
听G锘�, Schwarzer
听G锘�. 听How to perform a meta-analysis with R: a practical tutorial.听锘� 听Evid Based Ment Health. 2019;22(4):153-160. doi:锘�
20.Borenstein
听M锘�, Higgins
听JP锘�. 听Meta-analysis and subgroups.听锘� 听Prev Sci. 2013;14(2):134-143. doi:锘�
21.Provencio
听M锘�, Nadal
听E锘�, Gonz谩lez-Larriba
听JL锘�,
听et al. 听Perioperative nivolumab and chemotherapy in stage III non-small-cell lung cancer.听锘� 听N Engl J Med. 2023;389(6):504-513. doi:锘�
22.Pless
听M锘�, Stupp
听R锘�, Ris
听HB锘�,
听et al; SAKK Lung Cancer Project Group. 听Induction chemoradiation in stage IIIA/N2 non-small-cell lung cancer: a phase 3 randomised trial.听锘� 听尝补苍肠别迟. 2015;386(9998):1049-1056. doi:锘�
23.Lei
听J锘�, Zhao
听J锘�, Gong
听L锘�,
听et al. 听Neoadjuvant camrelizumab plus platinum-based chemotherapy vs chemotherapy alone for Chinese patients with resectable stage IIIA or IIIB (T3N2) non-small cell lung cancer: the TD-FOREKNOW randomized clinical trial.听锘� 听JAMA Oncol. 2023;9(10):1348-1355. doi:锘�
24.Chen
听WQ锘�, Li
听P锘�, Wang
听Q锘�,
听et al. 听[A randomized controlled study of erlotinib versus pemetrexed combined with cisplatin in neoadjuvant therapy of stage IIIA EGFR-mutant lung adenocarcinoma].听锘� 听Zhonghua Zhong Liu Za Zhi. 2018;40(2):133-137.
25.Cui
听Y锘�, Lin
听Y锘�, Zhao
听Z锘�, Long
听H锘�, Zheng
听L锘�, Lin
听X锘�. 听Comprehensive 18F-FDG PET-based radiomics in elevating the pathological response to neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy for resectable stage III non-small-cell lung cancer: a pilot study.听锘� 听Front Immunol. 2022;13:994917. doi:锘�
26.Ma
听G锘�, Chen
听W锘�, Ma
听M锘�. 听Effect of docetaxel combined with cisplatin preoperative neoadjuvant chemotherapy for stage III NSCLC.听锘� 听J Coll Physicians Surg Pak. 2019;29(12):1230-1231. doi:锘�
27.Provencio
听M锘�, Nadal
听E锘�, Insa
听A锘�,
听et al. 听Neoadjuvant chemotherapy and nivolumab in resectable non-small-cell lung cancer (NADIM): an open-label, multicentre, single-arm, phase 2 trial.听锘� 听尝补苍肠别迟 Oncol. 2020;21(11):1413-1422. doi:锘�
28.Provencio
听M锘�, Serna-Blasco
听R锘�, Nadal
听E锘�,
听et al. 听Overall survival and biomarker analysis of neoadjuvant nivolumab plus chemotherapy in operable stage IIIA non-small-cell lung cancer (NADIM phase II trial).听锘� 听J Clin Oncol. 2022;40(25):2924-2933. doi:锘�
29.Rothschild
听SI锘�, Zippelius
听A锘�, Eboulet
听EI锘�,
听et al; Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research (SAKK). 听SAKK 16/14: durvalumab in addition to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with stage IIIA(N2) non-small-cell lung cancer-a multicenter single-arm phase II trial.听锘� 听J Clin Oncol. 2021;39(26):2872-2880. doi:锘�
30.Sun
听C锘�, Liu
听Y锘�, Zhang
听P锘�,
听et al. 听Interim analysis of the efficiency and safety of neoadjuvant PD-1 inhibitor (sintilimab) combined with chemotherapy (nab-paclitaxel and carboplatin) in potentially resectable stage IIIA/IIIB non-small cell lung cancer: a single-arm, phase 2 trial.听锘� 听J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 2023;149(2):819-831. doi:锘�
31.Xiong
听L锘�, Lou
听Y锘�, Bai
听H锘�,
听et al. 听Efficacy of erlotinib as neoadjuvant regimen in EGFR-mutant locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer patients.听锘� 听J Int Med Res. 2020;48(4):300060519887275. doi:锘�
32.Zhang
听P锘�, Dai
听J锘�, Sun
听F锘�,
听et al. 听Neoadjuvant sintilimab and chemotherapy for resectable stage IIIA non-small cell lung cancer.听锘� 听Ann Thorac Surg. 2022;114(3):949-958. doi:锘�
33.Zhao
听X锘�, Su
听Y锘�, You
听J锘�,
听et al. 听Combining antiangiogenic therapy with neoadjuvant chemotherapy increases treatment efficacy in stage IIIA (N2) non-small cell lung cancer without increasing adverse effects.听锘� 听翱苍肠辞迟补谤驳别迟. 2016;7(38):62619-62626. doi:锘�
34.Zhao
听ZR锘�, Yang
听CP锘�, Chen
听S锘�,
听et al. 听Phase 2 trial of neoadjuvant toripalimab with chemotherapy for resectable stage III non-small-cell lung cancer.听锘� 听翱苍肠辞颈尘尘耻苍辞濒辞驳测. 2021;10(1):1996000. doi:锘�
35.Zhong
听WZ锘�, Chen
听KN锘�, Chen
听C锘�,
听et al. 听Erlotinib versus gemcitabine plus cisplatin as neoadjuvant treatment of stage IIIA-N2 EGFR-mutant non-small-cell lung cancer (EMERGING-CTONG 1103): a randomized phase II study.听锘� 听J Clin Oncol. 2019;37(25):2235-2245. doi:锘�
36.Zhong
听WZ锘�, Yan
听HH锘�, Chen
听KN锘�,
听et al. 听Erlotinib versus gemcitabine plus cisplatin as neoadjuvant treatment of stage IIIA-N2 EGFR-mutant non-small-cell lung cancer: final overall survival analysis of the EMERGING-CTONG 1103 randomised phase II trial.听锘� 听Signal Transduct Target Ther. 2023;8(1):76. doi:锘�
37.Zhu
听J锘�, Zhang
听Y锘�, Wang
听M锘�,
听et al. 听Outcomes in 36 patients with stage IIIA-N2 squamous cell carcinoma of the lung treated with nab-paclitaxel plus carboplatin as neoadjuvant therapy: a prospective study from a single center.听锘� 听Med Sci Monit. 2021;27:e930738. doi:锘�
38.Cascone
听T锘�, Leung
听CH锘�, Weissferdt
听A锘�,
听et al. 听Neoadjuvant chemotherapy plus nivolumab with or without ipilimumab in operable non-small cell lung cancer: the phase 2 platform NEOSTAR trial.听锘� 听Nat Med. 2023;29(3):593-604. doi:锘�
39.Westeel
听V锘�, Quoix
听E锘�, Puyraveau
听M锘�,
听et al; Intergroupe Francophone de Canc茅rologie Thoracique. 听A randomised trial comparing preoperative to perioperative chemotherapy in early-stage non-small-cell lung cancer (IFCT 0002 trial).听锘� 听Eur J Cancer. 2013;49(12):2654-2664. doi:锘�
40.Shao
听M锘�, Yao
听J锘�, Wang
听Y锘�,
听et al. 听Two vs three cycles of neoadjuvant sintilimab plus chemotherapy for resectable non-small-cell lung cancer: neoSCORE trial.听锘� 听Signal Transduct Target Ther. 2023;8(1):146. doi:锘�
41.Heymach
听JV锘�, Harpole
听D锘�, Mitsudomi
听T锘�,
听et al; AEGEAN Investigators. 听Perioperative durvalumab for resectable non-small-cell lung cancer.听锘� 听N Engl J Med. 2023;389(18):1672-1684. doi:锘�
42.Cascone
听T锘�, Gold
听KA锘�, Swisher
听SG锘�,
听et al. 听Induction cisplatin docetaxel followed by surgery and erlotinib in non-small cell lung cancer.听锘� 听Ann Thorac Surg. 2018;105(2):418-424. doi:锘�
43.Chaft
听JE锘�, Dunphy
听M锘�, Naidoo
听J锘�,
听et al. 听Adaptive neoadjuvant chemotherapy guided by (18)F-FDG PET in resectable non-small cell lung cancers: the NEOSCAN trial.听锘� 听J Thorac Oncol. 2016;11(4):537-544. doi:锘�
44.Chen
听Z锘�, Luo
听Q锘�, Jian
听H锘�,
听et al. 听Long-term results of a randomized controlled trial evaluating preoperative chemotherapy in resectable non-small cell lung cancer.听锘� 听Onco Targets Ther. 2013;6:645-650. doi:
45.Dy
听GK锘�, Bogner
听PN锘�, Tan
听W锘�,
听et al. 听Phase II study of perioperative chemotherapy with cisplatin and pemetrexed in non-small-cell lung cancer.听锘� 听J Thorac Oncol. 2014;9(2):222-230. doi:锘�
46.Gu
听L锘�, Wang
听X锘�, Sun
听Y锘�,
听et al. 听An open, observational, three-arm clinical study of 2-3 cycles of treatment as neoadjuvant therapy in operable locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer: an interim analysis.听锘� 听Front Immunol. 2022;13:938269. doi:锘�
47.Hainsworth
听JD锘�, Waterhouse
听DM锘�, Shih
听KC锘�,
听et al. 听Phase II trial of preoperative pemetrexed plus carboplatin in patients with stage IB-III nonsquamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).听锘� 听Lung Cancer. 2018;118:6-12. doi:锘�
48.Hou
听H锘�, Wang
听Y锘�, Sun
听D锘�,
听et al. 听Neoadjuvant toripalimab plus platinum-paclitaxel chemotherapy in stage II-III non-small cell lung cancer: a single-center, single-arm, phase I study in China.听锘� 听Invest New Drugs. 2023;41(1):86-92. doi:锘�
49.Li
听C锘�, Wu
听J锘�, Zhang
听L锘�,
听et al. 听Brief report: acetaminophen reduces neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy efficacy in patients with NSCLC by promoting neutrophil extracellular trap formation: analysis from a phase 2 clinical trial.听锘� 听JTO Clin Res Rep. 2023;4(9):100556. doi:锘�
50.Li
听W-G锘�, Cui
听J锘�, Wang
听JJ锘�,
听et al. 听Preoperative bronchial artery infusion chemotherapy in the treatment of stage Ilia (N2) non-small cell lung cancer.听锘� 听Journal of Interventional Radiology (China). 2015;24:160-165.
51.Mittal
听A锘�, Malik
听PS锘�, Kumar
听S锘�,
听et al. 听Dose-dense paclitaxel and carboplatin as neoadjuvant chemotherapy for stage IIB/IIIA non-small cell lung cancer鈥攁 phase II trial.听锘� 听Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol). 2021;33(12):e553-e560. doi:锘�
52.Romine
听PE锘�, Martins
听RG锘�, Eaton
听KD锘�,
听et al. 听Long term follow-up of neoadjuvant chemotherapy for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) investigating early positron emission tomography (PET) scan as a predictor of outcome.听锘� 听BMC Cancer. 2019;19(1):70. doi:锘�
53.Shen
听D锘�, Wang
听J锘�, Wu
听J锘�,
听et al. 听Neoadjuvant pembrolizumab with chemotherapy for the treatment of stage IIB-IIIB resectable lung squamous cell carcinoma.听锘� 听J Thorac Dis. 2021;13(3):1760-1768. doi:锘�
54.Shu
听CA锘�, Gainor
听JF锘�, Awad
听MM锘�,
听et al. 听Neoadjuvant atezolizumab and chemotherapy in patients with resectable non-small-cell lung cancer: an open-label, multicentre, single-arm, phase 2 trial.听锘� 听尝补苍肠别迟 Oncol. 2020;21(6):786-795. doi:锘�
55.Tao
听Y锘�, Li
听X锘�, Liu
听B锘�,
听et al. 听Association of early immune-related adverse events with treatment efficacy of neoadjuvant toripalimab in resectable advanced non-small cell lung cancer.听锘� 听Front Oncol. 2023;13:1135140. doi:锘�
56.Tfayli
听A锘�, Al Assaad
听M锘�, Fakhri
听G锘�,
听et al. 听Neoadjuvant chemotherapy and avelumab in early stage resectable nonsmall cell lung cancer.听锘� 听颁补苍肠别谤 Med. 2020;9(22):8406-8411. doi:锘�
57.Yan
听W锘�, Zhong
听WZ锘�, Liu
听YH锘�,
听et al. 听Adebrelimab (SHR-1316) in combination with chemotherapy as perioperative treatment in patients with resectable stage II to III NSCLCs: an open-label, multicenter, phase 1b trial.听锘� 听J Thorac Oncol. 2023;18(2):194-203. doi:锘�
58.Yang
听CJ锘�, McSherry
听F锘�, Mayne
听NR锘�,
听et al. 听Surgical outcomes after neoadjuvant chemotherapy and ipilimumab for non-small cell lung cancer.听锘� 听Ann Thorac Surg. 2018;105(3):924-929. doi:锘�
59.Zhu
听B锘�, Yang
听J锘�, Zhang
听P锘�, Shen
听L锘�, Li
听X锘�, Li
听J锘�. 听Safety and effectiveness of localized lung resection combined with neoadjuvant chemotherapy in the treatment of stage I-II non-small cell lung cancer.听锘� 听Oncol Lett. 2017;13(4):2344-2348. doi:锘�
60.Zhu
听X锘�, Sun
听L锘�, Song
听N锘�,
听et al. 听Safety and effectiveness of neoadjuvant PD-1 inhibitor (toripalimab) plus chemotherapy in stage II-III NSCLC (LungMate 002): an open-label, single-arm, phase 2 trial.听锘� 听BMC Med. 2022;20(1):493. doi:锘�
61.Cascone
听T锘�, Awad
听MM锘�, Spicer
听JD锘�,
听et al. 听LBA1 CheckMate 77T: phase III study comparing neoadjuvant nivolumab (NIVO) plus chemotherapy (chemo) vs neoadjuvant placebo plus chemo followed by surgery and adjuvant NIVO or placebo for previously untreated, resectable stage II鈥揑IIb NSCLC.听锘� 听Ann Oncol. 2023;34(Suppl 2):S1295. doi:
62.Yue
听D锘�, Wang
听W锘�, Liu
听H锘�,
听et al. 听LBA58 pathological response to neoadjuvant tislelizumab (TIS) plus platinum-doublet (PtDb) chemotherapy (CT) in resectable stage II-IIIA NSCLC patients (pts) in the phase III (Ph3) RATIONALE-315 trial.听锘� 听Ann Oncol. 2023;34(Suppl 2):S1299. doi:
63.Lu
听S锘�, Wu
听L锘�, Zhang
听W锘�,
听et al. 听Perioperative toripalimab + platinum-doublet chemotherapy vs chemotherapy in resectable stage II/III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC): interim event-free survival (EFS) analysis of the phase III Neotorch study.听锘� 听J Clin Oncol. 2023;41(16_suppl). doi:
64.Forde
听PM锘�, Spicer
听J锘�, Girard
听N锘�,
听et al. 听84O Neoadjuvant nivolumab (N) + platinum-doublet chemotherapy (C) for resectable NSCLC: 3-y update from CheckMate 816.听锘� 听J Thorac Oncol. 2023;18(4):S89-S90. doi:
65.Provencio Pulla
听M锘�, Forde
听PM锘�, Spicer
听J锘�,
听et al. 听LBA57 neoadjuvant nivolumab (N)+ chemotherapy (C) in the phase III CheckMate 816 study: 3-y results by tumor PD-L1 expression.听锘� 听Ann Oncol. 2023;34(Suppl 2):S1298-S1299. doi:
66.Provencio Pulla
听M锘�, Ford
听PM锘�, Spicer
听JD锘�,
听et al. LBA57鈥攏eoadjuvant nivolumab (N) + chemotherapy (C) in the phase III CheckMate 816 study: 3-y results by tumor PD-L1 expression. European Society for Medical Oncology Congress 2023; October 20-24, 2023; Madrid, Spain. Accessed February 19, 2024.
67.Spicer
听JD锘�, Gao
听S锘�, Liberman
听M锘�,
听et al. LBA56鈥攐verall survival in the KEYNOTE-671 study of perioperative pembrolizumab for early-stage non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). European Society for Medical Oncology Congress 2023; October 20-24, 2023; Madrid, Spain. Accessed February 19, 2024.
68.Lu
听S锘�, Wu
听L锘�, Zhang
听W锘�,
听et al. Perioperative toripalimab + platinum-doublet chemotherapy vs chemotherapy in resectable stage II/III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC): interim event-free survival (EFS) analysis of the phase III NEOTORCH study. 2023 American Society of Clinical Oncology Annual Meeting; June 2-6, 2023.;Chicago, IL. Accessed February 27, 2024.
69.Cascone
听T锘�, Awad
听MM锘�, Spicer
听JD锘�,
听et al. CheckMate 77T: phase III study comparing neoadjuvant nivolumab plus chemotherapy with neoadjuvant placebo plus chemotherapy followed by surgery and adjuvant nivolumab or placebo for previously untreated, resectable stage II鈥揑IIB NSCLC. European Society for Medical Oncology Congress 2023; October 20-24, 2023; Madrid, Spain. Accessed February 27, 2023.
70.Yue
听D锘�, Wang
听W锘�, Liu
听H锘�,
听et al. Pathological response to neoadjuvant tislelizumab (TIS) plus platinum-doublet (PtDb) chemotherapy (CT) in resectable stage II-IIIA NSCLC patients (pts) in the phase III (Ph3) RATIONALE-315 trial. European Society for Medical Oncology Congress 2023; October 20-24, 2023; Madrid, Spain. Accessed February 19, 2024.
71.Provencio
听M锘�, Calvo
听V锘�, Romero
听A锘�, Spicer
听JD锘�, Cruz-Berm煤dez
听A锘�. 听Treatment sequencing in resectable lung cancer: the good and the bad of adjuvant versus neoadjuvant therapy.听锘� 听Am Soc Clin Oncol Educ Book. 2022;42:1-18. doi:锘�
72.Moore
听CB锘�, Cox
听ML锘�, Mulvihill
听MS锘�, Klapper
听J锘�, D鈥橝mico
听TA锘�, Hartwig
听MG锘�. 听Challenging 30-day mortality as a site-specific quality metric in non-small cell lung cancer.听锘� 听J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2019;158(2):570-578.e3. doi:锘�