ArticlePloS one2024
Head-to-head comparison of composite and individual biomarkers to predict clinical benefit to PD-1 blockade in non-small cell lung cancer.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- MET Exon 14 Skipping Mutations in Lung Cancer: Clinical-Pathological Characteristics and Immune Microenvironment.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2025Article
- Monoclonal antibody immune therapy response instrument for stratification and cost-effective personalized approaches in 3PM-guided pan cancer management.The EPMA journal · 2025Review
- Immunotherapy for advanced-stage squamous cell lung cancer: the state of the art and outstanding questions.Nature reviews. Clinical oncology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe efficacy of PD-1 blocking agents in advanced NSCLC has shown prolonged effectiveness, but only in a minority of patients. Multiple biomarkers have been explored to predict treatment benefit, yet their combined performance remains inadequately examined. In this study, we assessed the combined predictive performance of multiple biomarkers in NSCLC patients treated with nivolumab.
methodsPretreatment samples from 135 patients receiving nivolumab were used to evaluate the predictive performance of CD8 tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs), intratumoral (IT) localization of CD8 TILs, PD-1 high expressing TILs (PD1T TILs), CD3 TILs, CD20 B-cells, tertiary lymphoid structures (TLS), PD-L1 tumor proportion score (TPS) and the Tumor Inflammation score (TIS). Patients were randomly assigned to a training (n = 55) and validation cohort (n = 80). The primary outcome measure was Disease Control at 6 months (DC 6m) and the secondary outcome measure was DC at 12 months (DC 12m).
resultsIn the validation cohort, the two best performing composite biomarkers (i.e. CD8+IT-CD8 and CD3+IT-CD8) demonstrated similar or lower sensitivity (64% and 83%) and NPV (76% and 85%) compared to individual biomarkers PD-1T TILs and TIS (sensitivity: 72% and 83%, NPV: 86% and 84%) for DC 6m, respectively. Additionally, at 12 months, both selected composite biomarkers (CD8+IT-CD8 and CD8+TIS) demonstrated inferior predictive performance compared to PD-1T TILs and TIS alone. PD-1T TILs and TIS showed high sensitivity (86% and 100%) and NPV (95% and 100%) for DC 12m. PD-1T TILs could more accurately discriminate patients with no long-term benefit, as specificity was substantially higher compared to TIS (74% versus 39%).
conclusionComposite biomarkers did not show improved predictive performance compared to PD-1T TILs and TIS alone for both the 6- and 12-month endpoints. PD-1T TILs and TIS identified patients with DC 12m with high sensitivity. Patients with no long-term benefit to PD-1 blockade were most accurately identified by PD-1T TILs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.