BackgroundProgrammed death-1 (PD-1)/programmed death ligand-1 (PD-L1) inhibitors displayed considerable advantages in neoadjuvant therapy of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), but the specific application of neoadjuvant immunotherapy has not been well determined, and the long-term prognostic data of neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy combined with surgical resection of NSCLC remains limited. In this study, we intended to assess the efficacy of the neoadjuvant therapy of the PD-1 inhibitor and long-term prognosis in patients with resectable NSCLC.MethodsWe retrospectively analyzed NSCLC surgical patients treated with neoadjuvant therapy in our hospital, and divided them into a neoadjuvant chemotherapy group and a neoadjuvant immunotherapy combined with chemotherapy group. The propensity score matching method was used to evaluate the effectiveness of immunotherapy combined with chemotherapy in the treatment of resectable lung cancer, and the long-term prognosis of these two groups was compared.ResultsA total of 62 cases were enrolled, including 20 patients (20/62, 32.26%) in the immunotherapy group and 42 patients (42/62, 67.74%) in the chemotherapy group. The clinical baseline data of these two groups were balanced. In the immunotherapy group, all patients had tumor regression in imaging finding (tumor regression ratio: 11.88% - 75.00%). In the chemotherapy group, 30 patients had tumor regression (tumor regression ratio: 2.70% - 58.97%). The R0 removal rates of cancers were comparable between the immunotherapy group and chemotherapy group (19/20, 95.00% vs. 39/42, 92.86%, P=1.000). The two groups were balanced in complete minimally invasive surgery, pneumonectomy, operative duration, blood loss, postoperative complications, and hospital stay. The immunotherapy group had more sleeve resection (36.84% vs. 10.26%, p=0.039) including bronchial sleeve and vascular sleeve, higher pathological complete response (pCR) rate (57.89% vs. 5.13%, P<0.001) and major pathologic response (MPR) rate (78.95% vs. 10.26%, P<0.001). There were no differences in survival curves for: smoker and non-smoker, squamous cell carcinoma and adenocarcinoma, or right lung cancer and left lung cancer. Moreover, patients who achieved MPR (including pCR) had significantly better overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS). Patients in immunotherapy group had significantly better OS and longer DFS than those in chemotherapy group.ConclusionsIn conclusion, neoadjuvant immunotherapy combined with chemotherapy can provide better OS and DFS and improving pCR and MPR rates by shrinking tumors.This study has been registered in the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry, number ChiCTR2200060433. http://www.chictr.org.cn/edit.aspx?pid=170157&htm=4.

ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to investigate the cost-effectiveness of serplulimab versus regorafenib in previously treated unresectable or metastatic microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H)/deficient mismatch repair (dMMR) colorectal cancer in China.MethodsFrom the perspective of China’s health-care system, a Markov model with three health states (progression free, progression, death) was developed for estimating the costs and health outcomes of serplulimab and regorafenib. Data for unanchored matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC), standard parametric survival analysis, the mixed cure model, and transition probabilities calculation were obtained from clinical trials (ASTRUM-010 and CONCUR). Health-care resource utilization and costs were derived from government-published data and expert interviews. Utilities used to calculate quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were obtained from clinical trials and literature reviews. The primary outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) expressed as cost/QALY gained. Four scenarios were considered in scenario analysis: (a) using original survival data without conducting MAIC; (b) limiting the time horizon to the follow-up time of the clinical trial of serplulimab; (c) adopting a fourfold increase in the risk of death; and (d) applying utilities from two other sources. One-way sensitivity analysis and probabilistic sensitivity analysis were also performed to assess the uncertainty of the results.ResultsIn the base-case analysis, serplulimab provided 6.00 QALYs at a cost of $68,722, whereas regorafenib provided 0.69 QALYs at a cost of $40,106. Compared with that for treatment with regorafenib, the ICER for treatment with serplulimab was $5,386/QALY, which was significantly lower than the triple GDP per capita of China in 2021 ($30,036), which was the threshold used to define the cost-effectiveness. In the scenario analysis, the ICERs were $6,369/QALY, $20,613/QALY, $6,037/QALY, $4,783/QALY, and $6,167/QALY, respectively. In the probabilistic sensitivity analysis, the probability of serplulimab being cost-effective was 100% at the threshold of $30,036/QALY.ConclusionCompared with regorafenib, serplulimab is a cost-effective treatment for patients with previously treated unresectable or metastatic MSI-H/dMMR colorectal cancer in China.