The Anti-PD-1/PD-L1 Immunotherapy for Gastric Esophageal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis and Literature Review

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

Background:

Treatment options for advanced gastric esophageal cancer are quite limited. Chemotherapy is unavoidable at certain stages, and research on targeted therapies has mostly failed. The advent of immunotherapy has brought hope for the treatment of advanced gastric esophageal cancer. The aim of the study was to analyze the safety of anti-PD-1/PD-L1 immunotherapy and the long-term survival of patients who were diagnosed as gastric esophageal cancer and received anti-PD-1/PD-L1 immunotherapy.

Method:

Studies on anti-PD-1/PD-L1 immunotherapy of advanced gastric esophageal cancer published before February 1, 2020 were searched online. The survival (e.g. 6-month overall survival, 12-month overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rates (ORR)) and adverse effects of immunotherapy were compared to that of control therapy (physician’s choice of therapy).

Results:

After screening 185 studies, 4 comparative cohort studies which reported the long-term survival of patients receiving immunotherapy were included. Compared to control group, the 12-month survival (OR = 1.67, 95% CI: 1.31 to 2.12, P < 0.0001) and 18-month survival (OR = 1.98, 95% CI: 1.39 to 2.81, P = 0.0001) were significantly longer in immunotherapy group. The 3-month survival rate (OR = 1.05, 95% CI: 0.36 to 3.06, P = 0.92) and 18-month survival rate (OR = 1.44, 95% CI: 0.98 to 2.12, P = 0.07) were not significantly different between immunotherapy group and control group. The ORR were not significantly different between immunotherapy group and control group (OR = 1.54, 95% CI: 0.65 to 3.66, P = 0.01). Meta-analysis pointed out that in the PD-L1 CPS ≥10 sub group population, the immunotherapy could obviously benefit the patients in tumor response rates (OR = 3.80, 95% CI: 1.89 to 7.61, P = 0.0002).

Conclusion:

For the treatment of advanced gastric esophageal cancer, the therapeutic efficacy of anti-PD-1/PD-L1 immunotherapy was superior to that of chemotherapy or palliative care.

Related collections

Most cited references 57

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Cancer statistics, 2019

Rebecca Siegel, Kimberly D Miller, Ahmedin Jemal (2019)

Each year, the American Cancer Society estimates the numbers of new cancer cases and deaths that will occur in the United States and compiles the most recent data on cancer incidence, mortality, and survival. Incidence data, available through 2015, were collected by the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program; the National Program of Cancer Registries; and the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries. Mortality data, available through 2016, were collected by the National Center for Health Statistics. In 2019, 1,762,450 new cancer cases and 606,880 cancer deaths are projected to occur in the United States. Over the past decade of data, the cancer incidence rate (2006-2015) was stable in women and declined by approximately 2% per year in men, whereas the cancer death rate (2007-2016) declined annually by 1.4% and 1.8%, respectively. The overall cancer death rate dropped continuously from 1991 to 2016 by a total of 27%, translating into approximately 2,629,200 fewer cancer deaths than would have been expected if death rates had remained at their peak. Although the racial gap in cancer mortality is slowly narrowing, socioeconomic inequalities are widening, with the most notable gaps for the most preventable cancers. For example, compared with the most affluent counties, mortality rates in the poorest counties were 2-fold higher for cervical cancer and 40% higher for male lung and liver cancers during 2012-2016. Some states are home to both the wealthiest and the poorest counties, suggesting the opportunity for more equitable dissemination of effective cancer prevention, early detection, and treatment strategies. A broader application of existing cancer control knowledge with an emphasis on disadvantaged groups would undoubtedly accelerate progress against cancer.

0 comments Cited 6661 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Pembrolizumab versus Chemotherapy for PD-L1–Positive Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer

Martin Reck, Delvys Rodriguez-Abreu, Andrew G Robinson … (2016)

Pembrolizumab is a humanized monoclonal antibody against programmed death 1 (PD-1) that has antitumor activity in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), with increased activity in tumors that express programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1).

0 comments Cited 2618 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Is Open Access

The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration.

Alessandro Liberati, Douglas G. Altman, Jennifer Tetzlaff … (2009)

Systematic reviews and meta-analyses are essential to summarize evidence relating to efficacy and safety of health care interventions accurately and reliably. The clarity and transparency of these reports, however, is not optimal. Poor reporting of systematic reviews diminishes their value to clinicians, policy makers, and other users. Since the development of the QUOROM (QUality Of Reporting Of Meta-analysis) Statement--a reporting guideline published in 1999--there have been several conceptual, methodological, and practical advances regarding the conduct and reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Also, reviews of published systematic reviews have found that key information about these studies is often poorly reported. Realizing these issues, an international group that included experienced authors and methodologists developed PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses) as an evolution of the original QUOROM guideline for systematic reviews and meta-analyses of evaluations of health care interventions. The PRISMA Statement consists of a 27-item checklist and a four-phase flow diagram. The checklist includes items deemed essential for transparent reporting of a systematic review. In this Explanation and Elaboration document, we explain the meaning and rationale for each checklist item. For each item, we include an example of good reporting and, where possible, references to relevant empirical studies and methodological literature. The PRISMA Statement, this document, and the associated Web site (http://www.prisma-statement.org/) should be helpful resources to improve reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analyses.

0 comments Cited 2366 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

All references

Author and article information

Journal

Journal ID (nlm-ta): Cancer Control

Journal ID (publisher-id): CCX

Journal ID (hwp): spccx

Title: Cancer Control : Journal of the Moffitt Cancer Center

Publisher: SAGE Publications (Sage CA: Los Angeles, CA )

ISSN (Print): 1073-2748

ISSN (Electronic): 1526-2359

Publication date (Electronic): 23 February 2021

Publication date Collection: Jan-Dec 2021

Volume: 28

Electronic Location Identifier: 1073274821997430

Affiliations

[1 ]Department of Gastrointestinal and Pancreatic Surgery, Ringgold 74678, Zhejiang Provincial People’s Hospital; , People’s Hospital of Hangzhou Medical College, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, People’s Republic of China

[2 ]Department of Medical Oncology, Ringgold 74678, Zhejiang Provincial People’s Hospital; , People’s Hospital of Hangzhou Medical College, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, People’s Republic of China

Author notes

[*]Zheling Chen and Liu Yang, Department of Medical Oncology, Zhejiang Provincial People’s Hospital, People’s Hospital of Hangzhou Medical College, No 158 Shangtang Road, Hangzhou, Zhejiang 310000, People's Republic of China. Emails: 383974903@ 123456qq.com ; yangliu@ 123456hmc.edu.cn

Author information

Ke Chen https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3148-9921

Zheling Chen https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3073-1811

Article

Publisher ID: 10.1177_1073274821997430

DOI: 10.1177/1073274821997430

PMC ID: 8482723

PubMed ID: 33618535

SO-VID: c6e4d4b0-a238-4cae-a6b2-beeefefd85f7

License:

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages ( https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).

History

Date received : 18 December 2020

Date revision received : 18 December 2020

Date accepted : 28 January 2021

Funding

Funded by: National Natural Science Foundation of China, FundRef https://doi.org/10.13039/501100001809;

Award ID: 81802623

Custom metadata

cover-date January-December 2021

typesetter ts3

Keywords: pd-1,pd-l1,gastric esophageal cancer,survival,immonotherapy

Data availability:

Keywords: pd-1, pd-l1, gastric esophageal cancer, survival, immonotherapy

Comments

Comment on this article

scite_

Cited by 23

See all cited by

Most referenced authors 2,071

See all reference authors

- Version 1

The Anti-PD-1/PD-L1 Immunotherapy for Gastric Esophageal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis and Literature Review

Read this article at

Abstract

Background:

Method:

Results:

Conclusion:

Related collections

Universal stem cells

Most cited references 57

Cancer statistics, 2019

Pembrolizumab versus Chemotherapy for PD-L1–Positive Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer

The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration.

Author and article information

Journal

Affiliations

Author notes

Author information

Article

History

Funding

Categories

Custom metadata

Comments

Comment on this article

Similar content 170

Cited by 23

Most referenced authors 2,071