Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38753055›Full record

SynthesisCancer immunology, immunotherapy : CII2024

The optimal threshold of PD-L1 combined positive score to predict the benefit of PD-1 antibody plus chemotherapy for patients with HER2-negative gastric adenocarcinoma: a meta-analysis.

Ji-Bin Li, Ming-Yu Lai, Zhuo-Chen Lin, Wen-Long Guan, Yu-Ting Sun, Jing Yang, Wen-Xuan Wang, Zhi-Rong Yang, Miao-Zhen Qiu

Abstract readMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Cancer immunology, immunotherapy : CII, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Ji-Bin Li *Department of Clinical Research, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Sun Yat-Sen University Cancer Center, 651 Dongfeng Road East, Guangzhou, 510060, People's Republic of China.
Ming-Yu Lai *Department of Medical Oncology, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Sun Yat-Sen University Cancer Center, 651 Dongfeng Road East, Guangzhou, 510060, People's Republic of China.
Zhuo-Chen Lin *Department of Medical Records, The First Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat‑Sen University, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China.
Wen-Long GuanDepartment of Medical Oncology, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Sun Yat-Sen University Cancer Center, 651 Dongfeng Road East, Guangzhou, 510060, People's Republic of China.
Yu-Ting SunDepartment of Medical Oncology, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Sun Yat-Sen University Cancer Center, 651 Dongfeng Road East, Guangzhou, 510060, People's Republic of China.
Jing YangDepartment of Medical Oncology, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Sun Yat-Sen University Cancer Center, 651 Dongfeng Road East, Guangzhou, 510060, People's Republic of China.
Wen-Xuan WangDepartment of Clinical Research, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Sun Yat-Sen University Cancer Center, 651 Dongfeng Road East, Guangzhou, 510060, People's Republic of China.
Zhi-Rong YangCenter for Biomedical Information Technology, Shenzhen Institute of Advanced Technology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shenzhen, 518055, People's Republic of China.
Miao-Zhen QiuDepartment of Medical Oncology, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Sun Yat-Sen University Cancer Center, 651 Dongfeng Road East, Guangzhou, 510060, People's Republic of China. qiumzh@sysucc.org.cn.

Funding

Guangdong Esophageal Cancer Research Institute M202308National Natural Science Foundation of China-Guangdong Joint Fund No. 2021A1515011792Wu Jieping Medical Foundation 320.6750.2023-19-8
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundImmune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) combined with chemotherapy have become the first-line treatment of metastatic gastric and gastroesophageal adenocarcinomas (GEACs). This study aims to figure out the optimal combined positive score (CPS) cutoff value.

methodsWe searched for randomized phase III trials to investigate the efficacy of ICIs plus chemotherapy for metastatic GEACs compared with chemotherapy alone. Pooled analyses of hazard ratios (HRs) based on PD-L1 expression were performed.

resultsA total of six trials (KEYNOTE-062, KEYNOTE-590, KEYNOTE-859, ATTRACTION-04, CheckMate 649, and ORIENT-16) were included, comprising 5,242 patients. ICIs plus chemotherapy significantly improved OS (HR: 0.79, 95% CI 0.72-0.86 in global patients; HR: 0.75, 95% CI 0.57-0.98 in Asian patients) and PFS (HR: 0.74, 95% CI 0.68-0.82 in global patients; HR: 0.64, 95% CI 0.56-0.73 in Asian patients) compared with chemotherapy alone. The differences in OS (ratio of HR: 1.05, 95% CI 0.79-1.40; predictive value: - 5.1%) and PFS (ratio of HR: 1.16, 95% CI 0.98-1.36; predictive value: - 13.5%) were not statistically significant between the global and Asian patients. Subgroup analyses indicated that the optimal CPS threshold was at ≥ 5 for OS and ≥ 10 for PFS with the highest predictive values.

conclusionsThe benefit derived from ICIs plus chemotherapy is similar between Asian and global GEAC patients. However, those with a PD-L1 CPS < 5 or CPS < 10 may not have significant benefits from ICIs therapy. Therefore, it is advisable to routinely assess PD-L1 expression in GEAC patients considered for ICIs treatment.

Indexed as

AdenocarcinomaAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsB7-H1 AntigenErb-b2 Receptor Tyrosine KinasesImmune Checkpoint InhibitorsStomach NeoplasmsBiomarkers, TumorClinical Trials, Phase III as TopicHumansPrognosisProgrammed Cell Death 1 ReceptorRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicB7-H1 AntigenBiomarkers, TumorCD274 protein, humanERBB2 protein, humanErb-b2 Receptor Tyrosine KinasesImmune Checkpoint InhibitorsProgrammed Cell Death 1 ReceptorCombined positive scoreCutoff valueGastric cancerImmune checkpoint inhibitorsMeta-analysis

Identifiers

PMID38753055
PMCPMC11098986

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.