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
. 2025 Jun;16(3):299-310.
doi: 10.14740/wjon2520. Epub 2025 Apr 22.

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

Affiliations

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

Laith Al-Showbaki et al. World J Oncol. 2025 Jun.

Abstract

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.

Keywords: Anti-PD-1; Anti-PD-L1; Immunotherapy; Non-small cell lung cancer; PD-L1 negative.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Laith Al-Showbaki: consulting from Novartis, AstraZeneca, and Janssen. Eitan Amir: consulting from Gilead and Novartis.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Study selection schema.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Funnel plot comparing the precision of individual studies in (a) anti-PD-1 and (b) anti-PD-L1. The y-axis represents the standard error. The x-axis displays the study estimated effect size (hazard ratio). Forrest plot comparing the heterogeneity of the included trials for the two subclasses (c) anti-PD-1 and (d) anti-PD-L1.PD-1: programmed cell death-1; PD-L1: programmed death-ligand 1.

Similar articles

References

    1. Thandra KC, Barsouk A, Saginala K, Aluru JS, Barsouk A. Epidemiology of lung cancer. Contemp Oncol (Pozn) 2021;25(1):45–52. doi: 10.5114/wo.2021.103829. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Zappa C, Mousa SA. Non-small cell lung cancer: current treatment and future advances. Transl Lung Cancer Res. 2016;5(3):288–300. doi: 10.21037/tlcr.2016.06.07. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Gridelli C, Rossi A, Carbone DP, Guarize J, Karachaliou N, Mok T, Petrella F. et al. Non-small-cell lung cancer. Nat Rev Dis Primers. 2015;1:15009. doi: 10.1038/nrdp.2015.9. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Howlader N, Forjaz G, Mooradian MJ, Meza R, Kong CY, Cronin KA, Mariotto AB. et al. The effect of advances in lung-cancer treatment on population mortality. N Engl J Med. 2020;383(7):640–649. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1916623. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Onoi K, Chihara Y, Uchino J, Shimamoto T, Morimoto Y, Iwasaku M, Kaneko Y. et al. Immune checkpoint inhibitors for lung cancer treatment: a review. J Clin Med. 2020;9(5):1362. doi: 10.3390/jcm9051362. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources