Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37822932›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in immunology2023

Comparison of different predictive biomarker testing assays for PD-1/PD-L1 checkpoint inhibitors response: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Haotong Shi, Wenxia Zhang, Lin Zhang, Yawen Zheng, Taotao Dong

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic ReviewNetwork Meta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in immunology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
3.0field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Leveraging Artificial Intelligence and Large Language Models for Cancer Immunotherapy.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. 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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Haotong ShiCheeloo College of Medicine, Shandong University, Jinan, China.
Wenxia ZhangDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan, China.
Lin ZhangDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan, China.
Yawen ZhengDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan, China.
Taotao DongDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan, China.
Qilu Hospital of Shandong University · CNShandong University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Accurate prediction of efficacy of programmed cell death 1 (PD-1)/programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) checkpoint inhibitors is of critical importance. To address this issue, a network meta-analysis (NMA) comparing existing common measurements for curative effect of PD-1/PD-L1 monotherapy was conducted. Methods: We searched PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library database, and relevant clinical trials to find out studies published before Feb 22, 2023 that use PD-L1 immunohistochemistry (IHC), tumor mutational burden (TMB), gene expression profiling (GEP), microsatellite instability (MSI), multiplex IHC/immunofluorescence (mIHC/IF), other immunohistochemistry and hematoxylin-eosin staining (other IHC&HE) and combined assays to determine objective response rates to anti-PD-1/PD-L1 monotherapy. Study-level data were extracted from the published studies. The primary goal of this study was to evaluate the predictive efficacy and rank these assays mainly by NMA, and the second objective was to compare them in subgroup analyses. Heterogeneity, quality assessment, and result validation were also conducted by meta-analysis. Findings: 144 diagnostic index tests in 49 studies covering 5322 patients were eligible for inclusion. mIHC/IF exhibited highest sensitivity (0.76, 95% CI: 0.57-0.89), the second diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) (5.09, 95% CI: 1.35-13.90), and the second superiority index (2.86). MSI had highest specificity (0.90, 95% CI: 0.85-0.94), and DOR (6.79, 95% CI: 3.48-11.91), especially in gastrointestinal tumors. Subgroup analyses by tumor types found that mIHC/IF, and other IHC&HE demonstrated high predictive efficacy for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), while PD-L1 IHC and MSI were highly efficacious in predicting the effectiveness in gastrointestinal tumors. When PD-L1 IHC was combined with TMB, the sensitivity (0.89, 95% CI: 0.82-0.94) was noticeably improved revealed by meta-analysis in all studies. Interpretation: Considering statistical results of NMA and clinical applicability, mIHC/IF appeared to have superior performance in predicting response to anti PD-1/PD-L1 therapy. Combined assays could further improve the predictive efficacy. Prospective clinical trials involving a wider range of tumor types are needed to establish a definitive gold standard in future.

Indexed as

Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell LungGastrointestinal NeoplasmsLung NeoplasmsB7-H1 AntigenBiomarkers, TumorHumansImmune Checkpoint InhibitorsProgrammed Cell Death 1 ReceptorProspective StudiesB7-H1 AntigenBiomarkers, TumorImmune Checkpoint InhibitorsProgrammed Cell Death 1 Receptoranti-PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors immunotherapybiomarkersmeta-analysispredictive value of testssolid tumor

Identifiers

PMID37822932
PMCPMC10562577
OpenAlexW4387104485

What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.