Evidence Hub

Efficacy and Safety of Programmed Death 1/Programmed Death-Ligand 1 Plus Cytotoxic T-Lymphocyte-Associated Antigen 4 Inhibitors for Advanced or Metastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Meta-analysis Based on Randomized Controlled Trials

Ren W, Fang Y, He Y, Ren Y, Wang M, Xu A, Ruan J, Tao Q

Therapeutic drug monitoring, 2024

4,943 participants · 1 citation

Abstract

Background: This meta-analysis aims to investigate the efficacy and safety of programmed death 1 (PD-1)/programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) combined with cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated antigen 4 (CTLA-4) inhibitors for patients with advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

Methods: Authors conducted a comprehensive search of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Scopus, and Medline for randomized controlled trials comparing the prognosis and safety of PD-1/PD-L1 plus CTLA-4 inhibitors with other therapies for advanced or metastatic NSCLC. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used as effect sizes. The primary outcomes of this study were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival.

Results: A total of 4943 patients diagnosed with stage III/IV advanced or metastatic NSCLC were included in the analysis of the 6 randomized controlled trials. The results showed that patients receiving dual immunotherapy with PD-1/PD-L1 plus CTLA-4 inhibitors had a longer survival time compared with the control group (HR = 0.88, P = 0.044). However, no statistically significant difference was observed in progression-free survival (HR = 0.95, P = 0.579). Subgroup analysis revealed better OS in the interventional group for patients aged >65 years (HR = 0.88, P = 0.076), smokers (HR = 0.81, P = 0.036), and those with a tumor mutational burden (TMB) ≥20 mut/Mb (HR = 0.66, P < 0.001). Conversely, the control group demonstrated superior OS in…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 4,943 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free