4.5 Article

PD-L1 and prognosis in patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma: a meta-analysis and bioinformatics study

Journal

THERAPEUTIC ADVANCES IN MEDICAL ONCOLOGY
Volume 12, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD
DOI: 10.1177/1758835920962362

Keywords

cancer risk; evidence-based medicine; malignant pleural mesothelioma; meta-analysis; PD-L1

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: The prognostic value of programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression in patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) has been controversial according to previous investigations. Therefore, we conducted a meta-analysis to assess the potential prognostic significance of PD-L1 expression in MPM. Methods: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library were thoroughly searched for relevant original articles published before 9 April 2020. The pooled hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were calculated. The results of the meta-analysis were verified using The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) dataset. Results: In total 16 studies were included in our meta-analysis. A high PD-L1 expression was associated with a poor OS (HR = 1.53, 95% CI = 1.28-1.83,p < 0.001), but not a grave PFS (HR = 1.07, 95% CI = 0.82-1.39,p = 0.643) in MPM. Furthermore, the PD-L1 expression correlated with the sarcomatoid + biphasic type of MPM (odds ratio = 4.32, 95% CI = 2.16-8.64,p < 0.001). TCGA data indicated that PD-L1 was a significant prognostic factor for OS (HR = 2.069, 95% CI = 1.136-3.769,p = 0.0175), but not for PFS (HR = 1.205, 95% CI = 0.572-2.539,p = 0.624), which was in accordance with the results of the meta-analysis. Conclusion: A high PD-L1 expression is a significant prognostic factor for poor OS of patients with MPM. We therefore suggest that PD-L1 expression levels can be used to predict the clinical outcomes of patients with MPM in the future.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available