Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31106827›Full record

SynthesisJournal of the National Cancer Institute2019

Sex-Based Heterogeneity in Response to Lung Cancer Immunotherapy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Fabio Conforti, Laura Pala, Vincenzo Bagnardi, Giuseppe Viale, Tommaso De Pas, Eleonora Pagan, Elisabetta Pennacchioli, Emilia Cocorocchio, Pier Francesco Ferrucci, Filippo De Marinis and 2 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 152 papers, 15 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
152citing papers in PubMed, 15 pooled it
11.9field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

152 citing papers in PubMed, 15 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 274 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Social determinants of health in studies using PROMs to assess toxicities associated with immune checkpoint inhibitor treatment: a systematic review.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Pooled it
  14. Pooled it
  15. Pooled it
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

92 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

Fabio ConfortiSee the Notes section for the full list of authors' affiliations.
Laura PalaSee the Notes section for the full list of authors' affiliations.
Vincenzo BagnardiSee the Notes section for the full list of authors' affiliations.
Giuseppe VialeSee the Notes section for the full list of authors' affiliations.
Tommaso De PasSee the Notes section for the full list of authors' affiliations.
Eleonora PaganSee the Notes section for the full list of authors' affiliations.
Elisabetta PennacchioliSee the Notes section for the full list of authors' affiliations.
Emilia CocorocchioSee the Notes section for the full list of authors' affiliations.
Pier Francesco FerrucciSee the Notes section for the full list of authors' affiliations.
Filippo De MarinisSee the Notes section for the full list of authors' affiliations.
Richard D GelberSee the Notes section for the full list of authors' affiliations.
Aron GoldhirschSee the Notes section for the full list of authors' affiliations.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWe previously showed that therapy with anti-checkpoints T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 (anti-CTLA-4) or antiprogrammed cell death protein 1 (anti-PD-1) agents was more effective for men as compared with women. However, because the sex-dimorphism of the immune system is complex, involving multiple elements of immune responses, it is possible that women could derive larger benefit than men from strategies other than therapy with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) alone. Here we investigated whether women could derive larger benefit than men from the combination of chemotherapy and anti-PD-1 or anti-PD-L1.

methodsWe performed two meta-analyses. The first included all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) testing anti-PD1 and anti-PD-L1 plus chemotherapy vs chemotherapy to assess different efficacy between men and women. The second included all RCTs of first-line systemic treatment in advanced non-small cell lung cancer testing anti-PD-1/PD-L1 given either alone or combined with chemotherapy to assess the different efficacy of these two immunotherapeutic strategies according to patients' sex. For each RCT included in the two meta-analyses, first, a trial-specific ratio of hazard ratios (HRs) was calculated from the ratio of the reported hazard ratios in men and in women; second, these trial-specific ratios of hazard ratios were combined across trials using a random-effects model to obtain a pooled hazard ratios ratio. A pooled HRs ratio estimate lower than 1 indicates a greater treatment effect in men, and higher than 1 a greater effect in women.

resultsEight RCTs were included in the first meta-analysis. The pooled overall survival hazard ratios (OS-HRs) comparing anti-PD-1/PD-L1 plus chemotherapy vs chemotherapy was 0.76 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.66 to 0.87) for men and 0.48 (95% CI = 0.35 to 0.67) for women. The pooled ratio of the overall survival hazard ratios reported in men vs women was 1.56 (95% CI = 1.21 to 2.01), indicating a statistically significant greater effect for women. Six RCTs were included in the second meta-analysis: three tested an anti-PD-1 alone, whereas three RCTs tested anti-PD-1/PD-L1 plus chemotherapy. The pooled overall survival hazard ratios were 0.78 (95% CI = 0.60 to 1.00) in men and 0.97 (95% CI = 0.79 to 1.19) in women for anti-PD-1 alone, compared with 0.76 (95% CI = 0.64 to 0.91) in men and 0.44 (95% CI = 0.25 to 0.76) in women for anti-PD-1/PD-L1 plus chemotherapy. The pooled ratio of overall survival hazard ratios was 0.83 (95% CI = 0.65 to 1.06) for anti-PD-1 alone, indicating a greater effect in men, and 1.70 (95% CI = 1.16 to 2.49) for anti-PD-1/PD-L1 plus chemotherapy, indicating a greater effect in women.

conclusionWomen with advanced lung cancer derived a statistically significantly larger benefit from the addition of chemotherapy to anti-PD-1/PD-L1 as compared with men.

Indexed as

ImmunotherapySex CharacteristicsB7-H1 AntigenCTLA-4 AntigenDisease-Free SurvivalFemaleHumansLung NeoplasmsMaleProgrammed Cell Death 1 ReceptorB7-H1 AntigenCD274 protein, humanCTLA-4 AntigenCTLA4 protein, humanPDCD1 protein, humanProgrammed Cell Death 1 Receptor

Identifiers

PMID31106827
PMCPMC6695312
OpenAlexW2946644285

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.