Immunotherapy Efficacy and Safety of Programmed Cell Death 1 (PD-1) Versus Programmed Death Ligand-1 (PD-L1) Inhibitors in Pan-Cancer Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Jianchun Duan,Longgang Cui,Xiaochen Zhao,Hua Bai,Guoqiang Wang,Zhengyi Zhao,Jing Zhao,Shiqing Chen,Jia Song,Chuang Qi,Qing Wang,Mengli Huang,Yuzi Zhang,Depei Huang,Yuezong Bai,Feng Sun,Shangli Cai,Zhijie Wang,Jie Wang
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3384914
2019-01-01
Abstract:Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) of programmed cell death 1 (PD-1) and its ligand (PD-L1) have led to a paradigm shift in cancer treatment. Here we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the efficacy and safety profile of anti-PD-1 and anti-PD-L1 in pan-cancer patients. Methods: We systematically searched PubMed, CENTRAL, and Embase from January, 2000 to March, 2019 for randomized controlled trials that compared anti-PD-1 and anti-PD-L1 with standard treatment in patients with solid tumors. We also reviewed abstracts and presentations from all major conference proceedings. Studies with anti-PD-1 and anti-PD-L1 were screened and paired upon the matching of clinical characteristics as mirror groups. For the main results, effect size for each mirror group was derived from the frequentist approach with R package netmeta, and pooled using a random-effects model. The primary outcome was the difference in overall survival (OS) between anti-PD-1 and anti-PD-L1. Findings: 19 randomized controlled trials involving 11,500 patients were included for the meta-analysis. Overall, anti-PD-1 exhibited superior OS (HR 0.75, 95% CI 0.65-0.86,P<0.0001) and progression-free survival (HR 0.73, 95% CI 0.56-0.96, P=0.02) over anti-PD-L1. No significant difference was observed for their safety profiles. Sensitivity analysis presented a satisfactory consistency of the overall estimates across these analyses. Consistent results were observed in a Bayesian framework with the same studies. Interpretation: Anti-PD-1 exhibited favorable survival outcomes and comparable safety profile with anti-PD-L1. Future head-to-head studies are warranted for optimization of treatment strategies in clinical practice.Funding Statement: China National Natural Sciences Foundation Key Program to JW, National Key R&D Program of China to JW, and China National Natural Sciences Foundation to ZWDeclaration of Interests: LC, GW, XZ, ZZ, JZ, S Chen, JS, CQ, QW, MH, YZ, DH, YB, and S Cai are employees of 3D Medicines Inc. The others declare no conflict of interest.Ethics Approval Statement: The study's registration number is PROSPERO CRD42019117586.