Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2018 Sep 10:362:k3529.
doi: 10.1136/bmj.k3529.

Efficacy of PD-1 or PD-L1 inhibitors and PD-L1 expression status in cancer: meta-analysis

Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Efficacy of PD-1 or PD-L1 inhibitors and PD-L1 expression status in cancer: meta-analysis

Xian Shen et al. BMJ. .

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the relative efficacy of programmed cell death 1 (PD-1) or programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitors versus conventional drugs in patients with cancer that were PD-L1 positive and PD-L1 negative.

Design: Meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

Data sources: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane database, and conference abstracts presented at the American Society of Clinical Oncology and European Society of Medical Oncology up to March 2018.

Review methods: Studies of PD-1 or PD-L1 inhibitors (avelumab, atezolizumab, durvalumab, nivolumab, and pembrolizumab) that had available hazard ratios for death based on PD-L1 positivity or negativity were included. The threshold for PD-L1 positivity or negativity was that PD-L1 stained cell accounted for 1% of tumour cells, or tumour and immune cells, assayed by immunohistochemistry staining methods.

Results: 4174 patients with advanced or metastatic cancers from eight randomised controlled trials were included in this study. Compared with conventional agents, PD-1 or PD-L1 inhibitors were associated with significantly prolonged overall survival in both patients that were PD-L1 positive (n=2254, hazard ratio 0.66, 95% confidence interval 0.59 to 0.74) and PD-L1 negative (1920, 0.80, 0.71 to 0.90). However, the efficacies of PD-1 or PD-L1 blockade treatment in patients that were PD-L1 positive and PD-L1 negative were significantly different (P=0.02 for interaction). Additionally, in both patients that were PD-L1 positive and PD-L1 negative, the long term clinical benefits from PD-1 or PD-L1 blockade were observed consistently across interventional agent, cancer histotype, method of randomisation stratification, type of immunohistochemical scoring system, drug target, type of control group, and median follow-up time.

Conclusions: PD-1 or PD-L1 blockade therapy is a preferable treatment option over conventional therapy for both patients that are PD-L1 positive and PD-L1 negative. This finding suggests that PD-L1 expression status alone is insufficient in determining which patients should be offered PD-1 or PD-L1 blockade therapy.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: All authors have completed the ICMJE form disclosure form at www.icmje.org/coi_disclosure.pdf and declare: no support from any organisation for the submitted work; no financial relationships with any organisations that might have an interest in the submitted work in the previous three years; no other relationships or activities that could appear to have influenced the submitted work.

Figures

Fig 1
Fig 1
Flowchart diagram of selected randomised controlled trials included in this meta-analysis
Fig 2
Fig 2
Hazard ratio of death for patients that are PD-L1 positive and PD-L1 negative assigned to intervention treatment, compared with those in control group. The therapy effects are calculated with fixed effects models. NR=not reported.
Fig 3
Fig 3
Subgroup analyses for overall survival in patients that are PD-L1 positive assigned to intervention treatment, compared with those assigned to control treatment
Fig 4
Fig 4
Subgroup analyses for overall survival in patients that are PD-L1 negative assigned to intervention treatment, compared with those assigned to control treatment

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Hanahan D, Weinberg RA. Hallmarks of cancer: the next generation. Cell 2011;144:646-74. 10.1016/j.cell.2011.02.013 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Sun C, Mezzadra R, Schumacher TN. Regulation and Function of the PD-L1 Checkpoint. Immunity 2018;48:434-52. 10.1016/j.immuni.2018.03.014 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Ribas A, Wolchok JD. Cancer immunotherapy using checkpoint blockade. Science 2018;359:1350-5. 10.1126/science.aar4060 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Xu-Monette ZY, Zhang M, Li J, Young KH. PD-1/PD-L1 Blockade: Have We Found the Key to Unleash the Antitumor Immune Response? Front Immunol 2017;8:1597. 10.3389/fimmu.2017.01597 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Baxi S, Yang A, Gennarelli RL, et al. Immune-related adverse events for anti-PD-1 and anti-PD-L1 drugs: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ 2018;360:k793. 10.1136/bmj.k793 - DOI - PMC - PubMed

MeSH terms