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
. 2021 Jun 26:38:100990.
doi: 10.1016/j.eclinm.2021.100990. eCollection 2021 Aug.

The effect of smoking status on efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors in metastatic non-small cell lung cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Linzheng Dai  1 , Bo Jin  2 , Tingting Liu  3 , Jun Chen  4 , Guang Li  1 , Jun Dang  1
Affiliations

The effect of smoking status on efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors in metastatic non-small cell lung cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Linzheng Dai et al. EClinicalMedicine. .

Abstract

Background: It remains uncertain whether smoking status can effect efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We performed a meta-analysis to address this issue.

Patients and methods: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and international meetings were searched until April 1, 2021, for phase 2 and 3 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) which compared ICIs with chemotherapy (CT) and reported overall survival (OS) and/or progression-free survival (PFS) data according to smoking status. This meta-analysis was registered in INPLASY platform (#INPLASY202140025). The random-effect model was used for statistical analysis.

Findings: Twenty-eight articles from 24 RCTs including 13918 patients were eligible. ICIs significantly prolonged OS than CT in smokers (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.75, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.69-0.81), but not in never-smokers (HR = 0.87, 95% CI: 0.74-1.04); while there was no significant treatment-smoking interaction (Pinteraction = 0.11). Significant heterogeneity was observed for both smokers (OS: I2 = 60%, P = 0.0002; PFS: I2 = 74%, P < 0.0001) and never smokers (PFS: I2 = 69%, P < 0.0001). Subgroup analyses revealed that ICIs monotherapy significantly improved OS in smokers (HR = 0.76, 95% CI: 0.69-0.85) but not in never-smokers (HR = 0.93, 95% CI: 0.77-1.12, Pinteraction = 0.07), and treatment-smoking interaction was significant in patients with PD-L1 ≥50% (HR, 0.61 vs 1.18; Pinteraction = 0.005). ICIs plus CT achieved better OS either in smokers or never-smokers (HR, 0.76 vs 0.61; Pinteraction = 0.39), while dual ICIs combination prolonged OS only in smokers but never-smokers (HR, 0.68 vs 1.02; Pinteraction = 0.02).

Interpretation: Either ICIs monotherapy or combination therapy was superior to CT in smokers. While ICIs monotherapy and dual ICIs combination were less effective in never-smokers, and ICIs plus CT might be the optimal selection. Nevertheless, given the limitation of the high heterogeneity of studies included, the findings need to be confirmed by future RCTs focusing on this subject.

Funding: None.

Keywords: Chemotherapy; Immune checkpoint inhibitors; Meta-analysis; Non-small cell lung cancer; Smoking status.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

None.

Figures

Fig 1
Fig. 1
Literature search and selection.
Fig 2
Fig. 2
Forest plot of hazard ratios comparing overall survival in patients who received ICIs vs CT. CI, confidence interval; Cur, current smokers; For, former smokers; ICIs, immune checkpoint inhibitors; CT, chemotherapy.
Fig 3
Fig. 3
Forest plot of hazard ratios comparing progression-free survival in patients who received ICIs vs CT. CI, confidence interval; Cur, current smokers; For, former smokers; ICIs, immune checkpoint inhibitors; CT, chemotherapy.
Fig 4
Fig. 4
Subgroup analyses for overall survival. HR, hazard ratio; CI, confidence interval; ICIs, immune checkpoint inhibitors; CT, chemotherapy.
Fig 5
Fig. 5
Subgroup analyses for progression-free survival. HR, hazard ratio; CI, confidence interval; ICIs, immune checkpoint inhibitors; CT, chemotherapy.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Blons H., Garinet S., Laurent-Puig P., Oudart J.B. Molecular markers and prediction of response to immunotherapy in non-small cell lung cancer, an update. J Thorac Dis. 2019;11(Suppl 1):S25–S36. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Conforti F., Pala L., Bagnardi V. Cancer immunotherapy efficacy and patients' sex: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Oncol. 2018;19(6):737–746. - PubMed
    1. Norum J., Nieder C. Tobacco smoking and cessation and PD-L1 inhibitors in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC): a review of the literature. ESMO Open. 2018;3(6) - PMC - PubMed
    1. Calles A., Liao X., Sholl L.M. Expression of PD-1 and Its ligands, PD-L1 and PD-L2, in smokers and never smokers with KRAS-mutant lung cancer. J Thorac Oncol. 2015;10(12):1726–1735. - PubMed
    1. Yang K., Li J., Bai C., Sun Z., Zhao L. Efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors in non-small-cell lung cancer patients with different metastatic sites: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Front Oncol. 2020;10:1098. - PMC - PubMed