Pui San Tan1, Pedro Aguiar2, Benjamin Haaland3, Gilberto Lopes4. 1. Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, UK. Electronic address: puisan.tan@gmail.com. 2. Clinical Oncology Sector, Federal University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil. 3. H. Milton Stewart School of Industrial and Systems Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology Atlanta, USA. 4. Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Miami, USA.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Role of PD-L1 expression to guide immunotherapies in previously treated advanced NSCLC remains unclear and there is a lack of data comparing immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) with each other. This network meta-analysis (NMA) aims to compare survival with ICIs to docetaxel and perform indirect comparisons between ICIs in the PD-L1 unselected population and by PD-L1 expression levels. METHODS: PubMed was searched and study screening was performed by two independent reviewers. NMA of survival outcomes in the PD-L1 unselected population and by PD-L1 expression levels <1%, >=1%,>=5%,>=10%, and >=50% was performed. Head-to-head indirect comparisons were constructed and treatment rankings were provided. Potential survival benefits by PD-L1 expression level as compared to a PD-L1 unselected population were estimated. RESULTS: 5 trials with 3024 total patients were included for meta-analysis. Overall, ICIs improved survival across PD-L1 expression levels compared to docetaxel, although there was only weak evidence of benefit for individual ICI nivolumab or atezolizumab in PD-L1<1%. PD-L1 subgroups suggested positive dose-response relationship between PD-L1 expression levels with survival benefits. In addition, there were also survival benefits due to selecting for PD-L1 in the PD-L1>=10% and >=50% subgroups as compared to the PD-L1 unselected population. Indirect comparisons of ICIs showed little evidence of differences between nivolumab, pembrolizumab and atezolizumab. DISCUSSION: ICIs improve survival in previously treated advanced NSCLC patients across PD-L1 expression levels compared to docetaxel. There is a positive dose-response relationship between PD-L1 expression and survival benefits, and little evidence of survival differences between nivolumab, pembrolizumab and atezolizumab.
INTRODUCTION: Role of PD-L1 expression to guide immunotherapies in previously treated advanced NSCLC remains unclear and there is a lack of data comparing immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) with each other. This network meta-analysis (NMA) aims to compare survival with ICIs to docetaxel and perform indirect comparisons between ICIs in the PD-L1 unselected population and by PD-L1 expression levels. METHODS: PubMed was searched and study screening was performed by two independent reviewers. NMA of survival outcomes in the PD-L1 unselected population and by PD-L1 expression levels <1%, >=1%,>=5%,>=10%, and >=50% was performed. Head-to-head indirect comparisons were constructed and treatment rankings were provided. Potential survival benefits by PD-L1 expression level as compared to a PD-L1 unselected population were estimated. RESULTS: 5 trials with 3024 total patients were included for meta-analysis. Overall, ICIs improved survival across PD-L1 expression levels compared to docetaxel, although there was only weak evidence of benefit for individual ICI nivolumab or atezolizumab in PD-L1<1%. PD-L1 subgroups suggested positive dose-response relationship between PD-L1 expression levels with survival benefits. In addition, there were also survival benefits due to selecting for PD-L1 in the PD-L1>=10% and >=50% subgroups as compared to the PD-L1 unselected population. Indirect comparisons of ICIs showed little evidence of differences between nivolumab, pembrolizumab and atezolizumab. DISCUSSION: ICIs improve survival in previously treated advanced NSCLCpatients across PD-L1 expression levels compared to docetaxel. There is a positive dose-response relationship between PD-L1 expression and survival benefits, and little evidence of survival differences between nivolumab, pembrolizumab and atezolizumab.
Authors: Diego L Kaen; Nicolas Minatta; Alessandro Russo; Umberto Malapelle; Diego de Miguel-Pérez; Christian Rolfo Journal: Adv Exp Med Biol Date: 2021 Impact factor: 2.622
Authors: Paolo Palmisciano; Ali S Haider; Chibueze D Nwagwu; Waseem Wahood; Kenny Yu; Chibawanye I Ene; Barbara J O'Brien; Salah G Aoun; Aaron A Cohen-Gadol; Tarek Y El Ahmadieh Journal: Anticancer Res Date: 2021-11 Impact factor: 2.435
Authors: Vivek Verma; Tanja Sprave; Waqar Haque; Charles B Simone; Joe Y Chang; James W Welsh; Charles R Thomas Journal: J Immunother Cancer Date: 2018-11-23 Impact factor: 13.751
Authors: Alexander Haragan; John K Field; Michael P A Davies; Carles Escriu; Aaron Gruver; John R Gosney Journal: Lung Cancer Date: 2019-06-05 Impact factor: 5.705