Laith Al-Showbaki, Malak Al-Kasasbeh, Karem Jbarah, Jowan Al-Nusair, Saif Yamin, Husam Alqaisi, Kamal Alrabi, Eitan Amir
{"title":"抗程序性细胞死亡-1与抗程序性死亡配体1 (PD-L1)在PD-L1阴性晚期非小细胞肺癌中的对比:系统综述和荟萃分析","authors":"Laith Al-Showbaki, Malak Al-Kasasbeh, Karem Jbarah, Jowan Al-Nusair, Saif Yamin, Husam Alqaisi, Kamal Alrabi, Eitan Amir","doi":"10.14740/wjon2520","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) which target programmed cell death-1 (PD-1) receptor or its ligand (PD-L1) are used extensively in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). In this article, we compared the relative efficacy of PD-1 inhibitors and PD-L1 inhibitors in PD-L1-negative advanced NSCLC.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched MEDLINE (host: PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar) for randomized trials for advanced NSCLC in which ICIs (anti-PD-1 or anti-PD-L1) were used where outcome data were reported based on PD-L1 testing, including the subset of PD-L1-negative patients. We extracted hazard ratios (HRs) and related 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and/or P values for progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) for the PD-L1-negative subgroup of each included trial. We then pooled data using a random effects meta-analysis and compared anti-PD-1 to anti-PD-L1 inhibitors. Variations in effect size were examined using subgroup analyses.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twenty-three trials were included in the meta-analysis. PD-L1 testing was performed in all participants. A total of 4,548 PD-L1-negative patients were included in the analysis, representing 33% of all participants in the included clinical trials. Overall, the addition of anti-PD-1 was associated with better OS in PD-L1-negative advanced NSCLC patients (HR: 0.75, 95% CI: 0.67 - 0.83, P < 0.01), while the addition of anti-PD-L1 inhibitors showed no improvement in OS (HR: 0.90, 95% CI: 0.78 - 1.05, P = 0.18). Compared to anti-PD-L1 agents, anti-PD-1 resulted in better OS in PD-L1-negative patients (HR: 0.83, 95% CI: 0.67 - 0.99, P = 0.01). The differential benefit of anti-PD-1 over anti-PD-L1 was of larger magnitude when checkpoint inhibitors were used in the first-line setting (pairwise comparison HR: 0.79, 95% CI: 0.66 - 0.93, P = 0.01), while there was no difference for later lines of therapy (pairwise comparison 1.13; 95% CI: 0.82 - 1.55, P = 0.45). These differences in OS were not observed when pooling PFS data.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Compared to checkpoint inhibitors targeting PD-L1, those targeting PD-1 are associated with better OS in PD-L1-negative advanced NSCLC, a finding influenced by trials performed in the first-line sitting. These data should be validated using real-world studies.</p>","PeriodicalId":46797,"journal":{"name":"World Journal of Oncology","volume":"16 3","pages":"299-310"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12185128/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Anti-Programmed Cell Death-1 Versus Anti-Programmed Death-Ligand 1 (PD-L1) in PD-L1-Negative Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Laith Al-Showbaki, Malak Al-Kasasbeh, Karem Jbarah, Jowan Al-Nusair, Saif Yamin, Husam Alqaisi, Kamal Alrabi, Eitan Amir\",\"doi\":\"10.14740/wjon2520\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) which target programmed cell death-1 (PD-1) receptor or its ligand (PD-L1) are used extensively in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). In this article, we compared the relative efficacy of PD-1 inhibitors and PD-L1 inhibitors in PD-L1-negative advanced NSCLC.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched MEDLINE (host: PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar) for randomized trials for advanced NSCLC in which ICIs (anti-PD-1 or anti-PD-L1) were used where outcome data were reported based on PD-L1 testing, including the subset of PD-L1-negative patients. We extracted hazard ratios (HRs) and related 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and/or P values for progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) for the PD-L1-negative subgroup of each included trial. We then pooled data using a random effects meta-analysis and compared anti-PD-1 to anti-PD-L1 inhibitors. Variations in effect size were examined using subgroup analyses.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twenty-three trials were included in the meta-analysis. PD-L1 testing was performed in all participants. A total of 4,548 PD-L1-negative patients were included in the analysis, representing 33% of all participants in the included clinical trials. Overall, the addition of anti-PD-1 was associated with better OS in PD-L1-negative advanced NSCLC patients (HR: 0.75, 95% CI: 0.67 - 0.83, P < 0.01), while the addition of anti-PD-L1 inhibitors showed no improvement in OS (HR: 0.90, 95% CI: 0.78 - 1.05, P = 0.18). Compared to anti-PD-L1 agents, anti-PD-1 resulted in better OS in PD-L1-negative patients (HR: 0.83, 95% CI: 0.67 - 0.99, P = 0.01). The differential benefit of anti-PD-1 over anti-PD-L1 was of larger magnitude when checkpoint inhibitors were used in the first-line setting (pairwise comparison HR: 0.79, 95% CI: 0.66 - 0.93, P = 0.01), while there was no difference for later lines of therapy (pairwise comparison 1.13; 95% CI: 0.82 - 1.55, P = 0.45). These differences in OS were not observed when pooling PFS data.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Compared to checkpoint inhibitors targeting PD-L1, those targeting PD-1 are associated with better OS in PD-L1-negative advanced NSCLC, a finding influenced by trials performed in the first-line sitting. These data should be validated using real-world studies.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46797,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"World Journal of Oncology\",\"volume\":\"16 3\",\"pages\":\"299-310\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12185128/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"World Journal of Oncology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.14740/wjon2520\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/4/22 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"World Journal of Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14740/wjon2520","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/4/22 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Anti-Programmed Cell Death-1 Versus Anti-Programmed Death-Ligand 1 (PD-L1) in PD-L1-Negative Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) which target programmed cell death-1 (PD-1) receptor or its ligand (PD-L1) are used extensively in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). In this article, we compared the relative efficacy of PD-1 inhibitors and PD-L1 inhibitors in PD-L1-negative advanced NSCLC.
Methods: We searched MEDLINE (host: PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar) for randomized trials for advanced NSCLC in which ICIs (anti-PD-1 or anti-PD-L1) were used where outcome data were reported based on PD-L1 testing, including the subset of PD-L1-negative patients. We extracted hazard ratios (HRs) and related 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and/or P values for progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) for the PD-L1-negative subgroup of each included trial. We then pooled data using a random effects meta-analysis and compared anti-PD-1 to anti-PD-L1 inhibitors. Variations in effect size were examined using subgroup analyses.
Results: Twenty-three trials were included in the meta-analysis. PD-L1 testing was performed in all participants. A total of 4,548 PD-L1-negative patients were included in the analysis, representing 33% of all participants in the included clinical trials. Overall, the addition of anti-PD-1 was associated with better OS in PD-L1-negative advanced NSCLC patients (HR: 0.75, 95% CI: 0.67 - 0.83, P < 0.01), while the addition of anti-PD-L1 inhibitors showed no improvement in OS (HR: 0.90, 95% CI: 0.78 - 1.05, P = 0.18). Compared to anti-PD-L1 agents, anti-PD-1 resulted in better OS in PD-L1-negative patients (HR: 0.83, 95% CI: 0.67 - 0.99, P = 0.01). The differential benefit of anti-PD-1 over anti-PD-L1 was of larger magnitude when checkpoint inhibitors were used in the first-line setting (pairwise comparison HR: 0.79, 95% CI: 0.66 - 0.93, P = 0.01), while there was no difference for later lines of therapy (pairwise comparison 1.13; 95% CI: 0.82 - 1.55, P = 0.45). These differences in OS were not observed when pooling PFS data.
Conclusions: Compared to checkpoint inhibitors targeting PD-L1, those targeting PD-1 are associated with better OS in PD-L1-negative advanced NSCLC, a finding influenced by trials performed in the first-line sitting. These data should be validated using real-world studies.
期刊介绍:
World Journal of Oncology, bimonthly, publishes original contributions describing basic research and clinical investigation of cancer, on the cellular, molecular, prevention, diagnosis, therapy and prognosis aspects. The submissions can be basic research or clinical investigation oriented. This journal welcomes those submissions focused on the clinical trials of new treatment modalities for cancer, and those submissions focused on molecular or cellular research of the oncology pathogenesis. Case reports submitted for consideration of publication should explore either a novel genomic event/description or a new safety signal from an oncolytic agent. The areas of interested manuscripts are these disciplines: tumor immunology and immunotherapy; cancer molecular pharmacology and chemotherapy; drug sensitivity and resistance; cancer epidemiology; clinical trials; cancer pathology; radiobiology and radiation oncology; solid tumor oncology; hematological malignancies; surgical oncology; pediatric oncology; molecular oncology and cancer genes; gene therapy; cancer endocrinology; cancer metastasis; prevention and diagnosis of cancer; other cancer related subjects. The types of manuscripts accepted are original article, review, editorial, short communication, case report, letter to the editor, book review.