Clinical and Molecular Characteristics Associated With Survival Among Patients Treated With Checkpoint Inhibitors for Advanced Non–Small Cell Lung Carcinoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Open accessAbstract
IMPORTANCE: Checkpoint inhibitors have replaced docetaxel as the new standard second-line therapy in advanced non-small cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC), but little is known about the potential predictive value of clinical and molecular characteristics. OBJECTIVE: To estimate the relative efficacy of checkpoint inhibitor vs docetaxel overall and in subgroups defined by clinicopathological characteristics. DATA SOURCES: This systematic review and meta-analysis searched MEDLINE, Embase, PubMed, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for randomized clinical trials published in the English language between January 1, 1996, and January 30, 2017. STUDY SELECTION: Randomized clinical trials that compared a checkpoint inhibitor (nivolumab, pembrolizumab, or atezolizumab) with docetaxel. For each trial included in this study, the trial name, year of publication or conference presentation, patients' clinicopathological characteristics, type of chemotherapy, and type of checkpoint inhibitor were extracted. Data collection for this study took place from February 1 to March 31, 2017. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two reviewers performed study selection, data abstraction, and risk of bias assessment. Hazard ratios (HR) and 95% CIs for the overall population and subgroups were extracted. Pooled treatment estimates were calculated using the inverse-variance-weighted method. RESULTS: In total, 5 trials involving 3025 patients with advanced NSCLC were included in this meta-analysis. These patients were randomized to receive a checkpoint inhibitor (nivolumab, 427 [14.1%]; pembrolizumab, 691 [22.8%]; or atezolizumab, 569 [18.8%]) or docetaxel (1338 [44.2%]). Checkpoint inhibitors were associated with prolonged overall survival, compared with docetaxel (HR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.63-0.75; P < .001). They prolonged overall survival in the EGFR wild-type subgroup (HR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.60-0.75; P < .001), but not in the EGFR mutant subgroup (HR, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.80-1.53; P = .54; interaction, P = .005), and they prolonged overall survival in the KRAS mutant subgroup (HR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.44-0.97; P = .03) but not in the KRAS wild-type subgroup (HR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.67-1.11; P = .24; interaction, P = .24). The relative treatment benefits were similar according to smoking status (never smokers [HR, 0.79] vs ever smokers [HR, 0.69]; interaction, P = .40), performance status (0 [HR, 0.69] vs 1 [HR, 0.68]; interaction, P = .85), age (<65 years [HR, 0.71] vs ≥65 years [HR, 0.69]; interaction, P = .74), histology (squamous [HR, 0.67] vs nonsquamous [HR, 0.70]; interaction, P = .71), or sex (male [HR, 0.69] vs female [HR, 0.70]; interaction, P = .82). CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: Checkpoint inhibitors, compared with docetaxel, are associated with significantly prolong overall survival in second-line therapy in NSCLC. The finding of no overall survival benefit for patients with EGFR mutant tumors suggests that checkpoint inhibitors should be considered only after other effective therapies have been exhausted. The findings of this meta-analysis could also assist in the design and interpretation of future trials and in economic analyses.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the same meta-analysis, immune checkpoint inhibitors did not significantly prolong overall survival in the KRAS wild-type subgroup.
“A recent systematic review and meta-analysis study, which integrated multiple randomized clinical trials, showed that immune checkpoint inhibitors significantly prolonged overall survival in the KRAS-mutant subgroup (HR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.44–0.97; P = 0.03) but not in the KRAS wild-type one (HR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.67–1.11; P = 0.24; interaction, P = 0.24) (98).”
From New Horizons in KRAS-Mutant Lung Cancer: Dawn After Darkness (2019) · cites this paper as [98]
Immune checkpoint inhibitors significantly prolonged overall survival in the KRAS-mutant subgroup in a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.
“A recent systematic review and meta-analysis study, which integrated multiple randomized clinical trials, showed that immune checkpoint inhibitors significantly prolonged overall survival in the KRAS-mutant subgroup (HR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.44–0.97; P = 0.03) but not in the KRAS wild-type one (HR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.67–1.11; P = 0.24; interaction, P = 0.24) (98).”
From New Horizons in KRAS-Mutant Lung Cancer: Dawn After Darkness (2019) · cites this paper as [98]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 35 · Cited by 598
- Authors
- Lee, C. K., Man, J., Lord, S., Cooper, W., Links, M., Gebski, V., Herbst, R. S., Gralla, R. J., Mok, T., & Yang, J. C.-H.
- Affiliations
- The University of Sydney (AU)
- St George Hospital (AU)
- National Health and Medical Research Council Clinical Trials Centre, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
- Yale Cancer Center (US)
- Albert Einstein College of Medicine (US)
- Chinese University of Hong Kong (HK)
- National Taiwan University (TW)
- Corresponding author
- Lee, Chee Khoon
- ORCID
- Venue
- JAMA Oncology
- Publisher
- American Medical Association (AMA)
- Published
- 2018-02-01
- Volume
- 4
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 210
- ISSN
- 2374-2437 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC5838598
- OpenAlex
- W2777461561
- Cited by
- 598
- References
- 35
- Citations by year
- 2026: 30 · 2025: 47 · 2024: 87 · 2023: 64 · 2022: 98 · 2021: 93 · 2020: 80 · 2019: 57 · 2018: 42
- FWCI
- 5.14
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- JAMA Oncology (publishedVersion)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Griffith Research Online (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Bristol-Myers Squibb
- Eli Lilly and Company
- Pfizer
- AstraZeneca
- Celgene
- Taiho Pharmaceutical
- Clovis Oncology
- Eisai
- National Institutes of Health (UL1TR001863)
- Genentech
- Ignyta
- National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer Immunotherapy and Biomarkers
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Lung Cancer Treatments and Mutations
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Lung Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
- Keywords
- immune checkpoint inhibitors, docetaxel, nivolumab, pembrolizumab, atezolizumab, overall survival, EGFR mutation status, predictive biomarkers, second-line therapy, immune-related adverse events, PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors, PD-L1 expression, tumor mutational burden
- MeSH terms
- Antineoplastic Agents, Immunological, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung, Female, Humans, Lung Neoplasms, Male, Middle Aged, Survival Analysis, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Disease Progression, Protein Kinase Inhibitors, Cell Cycle Checkpoints
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review