Dataset Information

Use of Immunotherapy With Programmed Cell Death 1 vs Programmed Cell Death Ligand 1 Inhibitors in Patients With Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Importance

Immune checkpoint inhibitors of programmed cell death 1 (PD-1) and its ligand (PD-L1) have led to a paradigm shift in cancer treatment. Understanding the clinical efficacy and safety profile of these drugs is necessary for treatment strategy in clinical practice.

Objective

To assess the differences between anti-PD-1 and anti-PD-L1 regarding efficacy and safety shown in randomized clinical trials across various tumor types.

Data sources

Systematic searches of PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Embase were conducted from January 1, 2000, to March 1, 2019. In addition, abstracts and presentations from all major conference proceedings were reviewed.

Study selection

All randomized clinical trials that compared anti-PD-1 and anti-PD-L1 with standard treatment in patients with cancer were selected as candidates. Retrospective studies, single-arm phase 1/2 studies, and trials comparing anti-PD-1 and anti-PD-L1 with other immunotherapies were excluded. Studies of anti-PD-1 and anti-PD-L1 therapy were screened and paired by the matching of clinical characteristics as mirror groups.

Data extraction and synthesis

Three investigators independently extracted data from each study following the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses) guideline. Trial names, first author, year of publication, study design, National Clinical Trial identifier number, blinding status, study phase, pathologic characteristics, number of patients, patients' age and sex distribution, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status, lines of treatment, study drugs, biomarker status, follow-up time, incidence of adverse events, and hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% CIs for overall survival and progression-free survival were extracted. A random-effects model was applied for data analysis.

Main outcomes and measures

Differences in OS between anti-PD-1 and anti-PD-L1 across different cancer types were assessed. An effect size was derived from each mirror group and then pooled across all groups using a random-effects model.

Results

Nineteen randomized clinical trials involving 11?379 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Overall, anti-PD-1 exhibited superior overall survival (HR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.65-0.86; P?Conclusions and relevanceComprehensive analysis suggests that anti-PD-1 exhibited favorable survival outcomes and a safety profile comparable to that of anti-PD-L1, which may provide a useful guide for clinicians.

SUBMITTER: Duan J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6990765 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Use of Immunotherapy With Programmed Cell Death 1 vs Programmed Cell Death Ligand 1 Inhibitors in Patients With Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Duan Jianchun J Cui Longgang L Zhao Xiaochen X Bai Hua H Cai Shangli S Wang Guoqiang G Zhao Zhengyi Z Zhao Jing J Chen Shiqing S Song Jia J Qi Chuang C Wang Qing Q Huang Mengli M Zhang Yuzi Y Huang Depei D Bai Yuezong Y Sun Feng F Lee J Jack JJ Wang Zhijie Z Wang Jie J

JAMA oncology 20200301 3

<h4>Importance</h4>Immune checkpoint inhibitors of programmed cell death 1 (PD-1) and its ligand (PD-L1) have led to a paradigm shift in cancer treatment. Understanding the clinical efficacy and safety profile of these drugs is necessary for treatment strategy in clinical practice.<h4>Objective</h4>To assess the differences between anti-PD-1 and anti-PD-L1 regarding efficacy and safety shown in randomized clinical trials across various tumor types.<h4>Data sources</h4>Systematic searches of PubM ...[more]

PMID: 31876895

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionProgrammed cell death-1/programmed cell death ligand-1 (PD-1/PDL-1) inhibitors are the newest class of approved drugs for advanced urothelial cancer (AdUC). This review aims to collate the evidence for their efficacy and safety in various treatment settings.MethodsExtensive search of databases was performed (updated May 2018) and the protocol was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42017081568). The review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analysis statement. STATA (v 12) and Revman 5.3.5 were used for data analysis.ResultsTen nonrandomized, open-label clinical trials were included in this review. PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors were used as second-line, stand-alone in eight trials and as first-line in cisplatin-ineligible in two trials. Heterogeneity was observed for study design, PDL-1 testing methods, cutoff criterias used and translational markers evaluated. The pooled objective response rate (ORR) was 18.2% (95% confidence interval [CI] 15.1-21.2, n = 1785) with PD-1/PDL-1 inhibitors in second-line settings as compared to 12.6% (95% CI 10.3-14.9, n = 736) with second-line chemotherapy and 23.7% (95% CI 19.9-27.4, n = 489) with PD-1/PDL-1 inhibitors as first-line therapy in cisplatin-ineligible patients. The median progression-free survival and overall survival was similar with PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors in both second- and first-line treatment settings (1.5-2.9 vs. 2.0-2.7 months and 7.9-18.2 vs. 15.9 months) and second-line chemotherapy (3.3-4.0 months and 7.4-8 months). Odds of achieving ORR was 0.10 (95% CI 0.03-0.31, n = 229) in the second-line, stand-alone setting with a combined positive score (CPS) cutoff of 25% and was 0.34 (95% CI 0.19-0.62, n = 265) with a CPS cut-off of 10% in first-line setting in the cisplatin-ineligible.ConclusionsPD-1/PDL-1 inhibitors appear to be promising in the treatment of AdUC and CPS may be a potentially reliable biomarker for predicting response but needs validation. Caution needs to be exercised until more data are available on imAEs and further studies are required to prove their worth as the standard of care.

Project description:Purpose:We performed this systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the incidence of fatal adverse events that were associated with the use of programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitors, to describe them and to statistically depict factors that were associated with these events. Method:PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library were completely searched based on the following terms or relevant Medical Subject Heading ones: "atezolizumab", "durvalumab", "avelumab", and "cemiplimab". Results:A total of 26 eligible studies were identified, incorporating 6,896 unique participants. The overall incidence was 1.24% (95% CI: 0.93-1.65%). The incidence and odds were higher in patients with non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) than those with urothelial carcinoma [(2.25 vs. 0.85, p = 0.04), (odds ratio [OR]: 2.69; 95% CI: 1.04-6.97, p = 0.04)], higher in the middle-aged group than the young group [(1.74 vs. 0.89, p = 0.01), (OR: 2.13; 95% CI: 1.26-3.61, p = 0.01)], and higher in the trial phase I than the trial phase II [(1.76 vs. 0.60, p = 0.01), (OR: 0.31; 95% CI: 0.13-0.75, p = 0.01)]. Notably, the trial phase I had a higher incidence than trial phase II or III following regulating for cancer types and average age (OR: 0.28; 95% CI: 0.11-0.71, p = 0.01, OR: 0.48; 95% CI: 0.24-0.95, p = 0.04, respectively). In terms of organ-specific fatal adverse events, interstitial lung disease (ILD) was frequently documented. A variety of respiratory system-related fatal adverse events were recorded, including but not limited to pneumonia and respiratory failure. As for organ-unspecific fatal adverse events, substantial cases of sepsis and neutropenia were recorded. Conclusion:This study firstly provided a comprehensive incidence and the spectrum of fatal adverse events associated with PD-L1 inhibitors, and identified three potential susceptible factors of that, yielding a capability for clinicians to distinguish high-risk populations from relatively low-risk ones, and facilitating to improve the safety of PD-L1 inhibitors broadly used in the clinical setting.

Project description:BackgroundThe prognostic value of programmed cell death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) in gynecological cancers has been explored previously, but the conclusion remains controversial due to limited evidence. This study aimed to conduct an updated meta-analysis to re-investigate the predictive significance of PD-L1 expression.MethodsPubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library databases were searched. The associations between PD-L1 expression status and prognosis [overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), recurrence-free survival (RFS), cancer-specific survival (CSS) or disease-free survival (DFS)], clinical parameters [FIGO stage, lymph node metastasis (LNM), tumor size, infiltration depth, lymphovascular space invasion (LVSI) or grade] and response to anti-PD-1/PD-L1 treatment [objective response rate (ORR)] were analyzed by hazard ratios (HR) or relative risks (RR).ResultsFifty-five studies were enrolled. Overall, high PD-L1 expression was not significantly associated with OS, PFS, RFS, CSS and DFS of gynecological cancers. However, subgroup analysis of studies with reported HR (HR = 1.27) and a cut-off value of 5% (HR = 2.10) suggested that high PD-L1 expression was correlated with a shorter OS of gynecological cancer patients. Further sub-subgroup analysis revealed that high PD-L1 expressed on tumor-infiltrating immune cells (TICs) predicted a favorable OS for ovarian (HR = 0.72), but a poor OS for cervical cancer (HR = 3.44). PD-L1 overexpression was also correlated with a lower OS rate in non-Asian endometrial cancer (HR = 1.60). High level of PD-L1 was only clinically correlated with a shorter PFS in Asian endometrial cancer (HR = 1.59). Furthermore, PD-L1-positivity was correlated with LNM (for overall, ovarian and endometrial cancer expressed on tumor cells), advanced FIGO stage (for overall, ovarian cancer expressed on tumor cells, endometrial cancer expressed on tumor cells and TICs), LVSI (for overall and endometrial cancer expressed on tumor cells and TICs), and increasing infiltration depth/high grade (only for endometrial cancer expressed on TICs). Patients with PD-L1-positivity may obtain more benefit from anti-PD-1/PD-L1 treatment than the negative group, showing a higher ORR (RR = 1.98), longer OS (HR = 0.34) and PFS (HR = 0.61).ConclusionOur findings suggest high PD-L1 expression may be a suitable biomarker for predicting the clinical outcomes in patients with gynecological cancers.

Project description:BackgroundProgrammed cell death protein-1 (PD-1) and programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitors have remarkable clinical efficacy in the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC); however, the breakdown of immune escape causes a variety of immune-related adverse events (irAEs). With the increasing use of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors alone or in combination with other therapies, awareness and management of irAEs have become more important. We aimed to assess the incidence and nature of irAEs associated with PD-1 and PD-L1 inhibitors for NSCLC.MethodsArticles from the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases were searched through December 2017. The incidence of overall and organ-specific irAEs was investigated in all clinical trials with nivolumab, pembrolizumab, atezolimumab, durvalumab, and avelumab as single agents for treatment of NSCLC. We calculated the pooled incidence using R software with package Meta.ResultsSixteen trials were included in the meta-analysis: 10 trials with PD-1 inhibitors (3734 patients) and 6 trials with PD-L1 inhibitors (2474 patients). The overall incidence of irAEs was 22% (95% confidence interval [CI], 17-28) for all grades and 4% (95% CI, 2-6) for high-grade irAEs. The frequency of irAEs varied based on drug type and organ, and patients treated with PD-1 inhibitors had an increased rate of any grade and high-grade irAEs compared with patients who received PD-L1 inhibitors. Organ-specific irAEs were most frequently observed in, in decreasing order, the endocrine system, skin, pulmonary tract, and gastrointestinal tract. The total number of patients whose death was attributed to irAEs was 14 (0.34%), and most (79%) of these patients died because of pneumonitis. The median time to the onset of irAEs after the initiation of treatment was 10 weeks (interquartile range, 6-19.5 weeks) and varied depending on the organ system involved.ConclusionsThe specificity of irAEs was closely associated with the mechanism of PD-1/PD-L1 antibodies involved in restarting anticancer immune attacks. Comprehensive understanding, timely detection, and effective management could improve the compliance of patients and guide the interruption of treatment.

Dataset Information

Use of Immunotherapy With Programmed Cell Death 1 vs Programmed Cell Death Ligand 1 Inhibitors in Patients With Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Importance

Objective

Data sources

Study selection

Data extraction and synthesis

Main outcomes and measures

Results

Publications

Use of Immunotherapy With Programmed Cell Death 1 vs Programmed Cell Death Ligand 1 Inhibitors in Patients With Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets