Abstract:Background: Although immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) monotherapy remains the standard of second-line treatment for patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) , the objective response rate (ORR) is low. There is an urgent need to increase the response population of second-line immunotherapy, and ICI combination therapy may be a possible option. However, the evidence is insufficient.Methods: We retrospectively collected the medical records of patients who received ICI monotherapy or ICI combination therapy as a second-line or later treatment option. We further analysed baseline clinical characteristics, evaluated treatment efficacy, assessed treatment-related adverse events (AEs) and followed up survival. The outcome variables assessed in the study were ORR, disease control rate (DCR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and AEs.Results: A total of 145 patients were ultimately enrolled in this study, including the ICI monotherapy group (n=63) and ICI combination therapy group (n=82). The ICI combination therapy group was further divided into the ICI/chemotherapy group (n=57) and ICI/anti-angiogenic therapy group (n=25). The baseline was comparable among the three subgroups. The ICI combination therapy groups showed a higher ORR (29.3% vs. 11.1%, P=0.008) and DCR (85.4% vs. 61.9%, P=0.001) and a longer PFS (6.77 vs. 3.47 months, P<0.001) and OS (18.60 vs. 8.47 months, P<0.001) than the ICI monotherapy group. The ICI/chemotherapy group showed a significantly higher ORR (31.6% vs. 11.1%, P=0.006) and DCR (84.2% vs. 61.9%, P=0.006) and a longer PFS (6.37 vs. 3.47 months, P<0.001) and OS (18.60 vs. 8.47 months, P<0.001) than the ICI monotherapy group. The ICI/anti-angiogenic therapy group showed a significantly higher DCR (88.0% vs. 61.9%, P=0.021) and a longer PFS (8.17 vs. 3.47 months, P<0.001) and OS (19.20 vs. 8.47 months, P=0.005) than the ICI monotherapy group. Neither of the combined ICI therapy groups showed a significant increase in the incidence of AEs compared to the ICI monotherapy group.Conclusions: ICI combined with chemotherapy or anti-angiogenic therapy as second-line or later treatment demonstrated superiority over ICI monotherapy in advanced NSCLC patients without prior immunotherapy. These results provide a potentially superior treatment strategy and require verification in prospective clinical trials.

[Fourth-Line and Beyond Therapy in Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: a Retrospective Analysis].

Third-line Therapy for Advanced Non-Small-cell Lung Cancer Patients: Feasible Drugs for Feasible Patients

Third- and further-line therapy in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer patients: an overview

Third-line Treatment: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Phase III ALTER-0303 Study—efficacy and Safety of Anlotinib Treatment in Patients with Refractory Advanced NSCLC.

Analysis of Prognostic Factors of Sequential Treatment in 355 Patients with Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

Immunotherapy combined with antiangiogenic therapy as third‐ or further‐line therapy for stage IV non‐small cell lung cancer patients with ECOG performance status 2: A retrospective study

Comparison of Therapeutic Efficacy of Gefitinib As Second-and Third-Line Therapies for Patients with Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

Treatment of stage IV non-small cell lung cancer: Diagnosis and management of lung cancer, 3rd ed: American College of Chest Physicians evidence-based clinical practice guidelines

Which Treatment is Preferred for Advanced Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer with Wild-Type Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor in Second-Line Therapy? A Meta-Analysis Comparing Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor, Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitor and Chemotherapy

First- and second-line treatment of advanced metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer: a global view

The impact of previous therapy strategy on the efficiency of anlotinib hydrochloride as a third-line treatment on patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC): a subgroup analysis of ALTER0303 trial

Prognostic Factors of Refractory NSCLC Patients Receiving Anlotinib Hydrochloride As the Third- or Further-Line Treatment.

The efficacy and safety of immune checkpoint inhibitors combined with chemotherapy or anti-angiogenic therapy as a second-line or later treatment option for advanced non-small cell lung cancer: a retrospective comparative cohort study

Third-line Treatment Patterns and Clinical Outcomes for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: a Retrospective Real-World Study.

Efficacy and Safety of Gefitinib As Third-line Treatment in NSCLC Patients with Activating EGFR Mutations Treated with First-line Gefitinib Followed by Second-line Chemotherapy

Treatment Pattern and Overall Survival of Patients with Advanced Non-Squamous Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Multicentric Real-World Study in China (CTONG1506)

Overall Survival Benefits For Combining Targeted Therapy As Second-Line Treatment For Advanced Non-Small-Cell-Lung Cancer: A Meta-Analysis Of Published Data

Effect of targeted therapy and immunotherapy on advanced nonsmall‐cell lung cancer outcomes in the real world

Gefitinib combined with stereotactic radiosurgery in previously treated patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer.

The Efficiency and Safety of Triple-Drug Combination of Albumin-Bound Paclitaxel, Anlotinib and PD-1/L1 Inhibitors in the 2nd or Above Line of Advanced NSCLC: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Real-world Clinical Characteristics and Treatment of Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Patients in China.