Abstract:Background The neoadjuvant use of immune checkpoint inhibitor combined with chemotherapy (nICT) or chemoradiotherapy (nICRT) in locally advanced esophageal cancer (EC) is currently an area of active ongoing research. Therefore, we carried out a comprehensive meta-analysis to compare the efficacy and safety of the new strategy with routine neoadjuvant strategy, which included neoadjuvant chemotherapy (nCT) and neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT). Patients and methods MEDLINE (via PubMed), Embase (via OVID), ISI Web of Science database and Cochrane Library were included. And, all of them were searched for eligible studies between January, 2000 and February, 2023. The pathological complete response (pCR) and major pathological response (MPR) were primary outcome of our study. The second outcome of interest was R0 resection rate. Odds ratio (OR) and associated 95% CI were used as the effect indicators comparing the safety and efficiency of the neoadjuvant immunotherapy with the routine neoadjuvant therapy. Fixed-effect model (Inverse Variance) or random-effect model (Mantel-Haenszel method) was performed depending on the statistically heterogeneity. Results There were eight trials with 652 patients were included in our meta-analysis. The estimated pCR rate was higher in the neoadjuvant immunotherapy group (OR =1.86; 95% CI, 1.25–2.75; I 2 = 32.8%, P =0.166). The different results were found in the esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) and esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) subgroups, the estimated OR was 2.35 (95%CI, 1.00–2.72; I 2 = 30.9%, P =0.215) in the EAC subgroup, and 2.35 (95% CI, 1.20–4.54; I 2 = 45.3%, P =0.161) in the ESCC subgroup, respectively. The neoadjuvant immunotherapy also showed the advantage in the MPR rates (OR =2.66; 95% CI, 1.69–4.19; I 2 = 24.3%, P =0.252). There was no obvious difference between the neoadjuvant immunotherapy and routine neoadjuvant therapy with respect to surgical resection rate, R0 resection rate, surgical delay rate; while more treatment-related adverse events were observed for the neoadjuvant immunotherapy for pneumonitis/pneumonia (OR=3.46, 95% CI, 1.31–9.16; I 2 = 67.3%, P =0.005) and thyroid dysfunction (OR=4.69, 95% CI, 1.53–14.36; I 2 = 56.5%, P =0.032). Conclusion The pooled correlations indicated that the neoadjuvant immunotherapy (both nICT and nICRT) could significantly increase the rates of pCR and MPR, compared with routine neoadjuvant therapy (both nCT and nCRT) in the treatment of locally advanced EC. The neoadjuvant immunotherapy and routine neoadjuvant therapy were with acceptable toxicity. However, randomized studies with larger groups of patients need to performed to confirm these results. Systematic review registration https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/ , identifier CRD42020155802.

Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy Versus Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy for the Treatment of Locally Advanced Esophageal Cancer: a Population-Based Analysis

Comparison of Two Different Neoadjuvant Chemoradiatiotherapy Regimens for Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer: Results of a Phase II, Multicenter, Randomized Trial.

Phase III Randomized Study of Preoperative Versus Postoperative Chemoradiotherapy in Resectable Locally Advanced Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma

Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy Versus Chemotherapy for the Treatment of Locally Advanced Esophageal Adenocarcinoma in the European Multicenter ENSURE Study

Application of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and neoadjuvant chemotherapy in curative surgery for esophageal cancer: A meta-analysis

Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy versus neoadjuvant chemotherapy for the treatment of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a propensity score-matched study from the National Cancer Center in China

Is postoperative adjuvant radiotherapy necessary for patients with esophageal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy? An analysis based on the SEER database

Postchemoradiotherapy Pathologic Stage Classified by the American Joint Committee on the Cancer Staging System Predicts Prognosis of Patients with Locally Advanced Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma

Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy Versus Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy Followed by Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy for Locally Advanced Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma: a Prospective Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial

Association of the Number of Dissected Lymph Node (LN) with the Survivals of Locally Advanced Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma (ESCC) Patients Received Preoperative Chemoradiotherapy (CRT) Followed by Surgery.

Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis: Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy for Locoregional Esophageal Cancer

Efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy versus neoadjuvant chemotherapy in locally advanced esophageal cancer: An updated meta-analysis

Survival Comparison Among Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy Followed by Esophagectomy, Definitive Chemoradiotherapy, and Esophagectomy Alone for Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma

Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy Combined with Immunotherapy versus Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy in Patients with Locally Advanced Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma

Survival after neoadjuvant chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy for resectable esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: A pooled analysis of randomized clinical trials

Postoperative Adjuvant Chemotherapy or Chemoradiation Versus Surgery Alone for Thoracic Pathological Node Positive Esophageal Cancer: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis (APEC Study 2)

Neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy was associated with better short-term survival of patients with locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma compared to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy

Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy for T3N0M0 Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma

Perioperative Outcomes and Survival after Neoadjuvant Immunochemotherapy for Locally Advanced Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma

Comparison of neoadjuvant immunotherapy versus routine neoadjuvant therapy for patients with locally advanced esophageal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Survival after neoadjuvant chemotherapy versus neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for resectable esophageal carcinoma: A meta-analysis.