4.6 Review

Predictive Markers for the Efficacy of Anti-PD-1/PD-L1 Antibodies in Lung Cancer

期刊

JOURNAL OF THORACIC ONCOLOGY
卷 11, 期 7, 页码 976-988

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jtho.2016.02.015

关键词

Lung cancer; Immunotherapy; PD-1; PD-L1; Biomarker

资金

  1. Lilly Oncology Fellowship from The Japanese Respiratory Society
  2. Alumni Scholarship from Juntendo University School of Medicine
  3. Uehara Memorial Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Blockade of the programmed death protein 1 (PD-1)/programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) axis using antibodies against the associated receptors and ligands has yielded good clinical responses and improved overall survival in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Once patients show a response to anti-PD-1/PD-L1 antibody, the median duration of response is often longer than that achieved using existing cytotoxic agents and even some molecular targeted agents. However, the response rates to these antibodies are only 15% to 20% in unselected patients with NSCLC and the cost of this therapy is high. Therefore, there is an urgent need for effective predictive biomarkers to identify patients likely to benefit. PD-L1 expression, which can be detected by immunohistochemical analysis, is a rational biomarker for selecting responders to anti-PD-1/PD-L1 antibody treatments, and this selection method has been introduced into clinical practice. However, the response rate to anti-PD-1/PD-L1 antibody in PD-L1-expressing patients with NSCLC is only 15% to 45%, response can occur in PD-L1-negative patients, and predictability based on PD-L1 expression may differ between nonsquamous NSCLC and squamous cell NSCLC. In addition, the methods of immunohistochemical analysis and evaluation of its results differ for different anti-PD-1/PD-L1 agents. This article reviews the existing data on predictive markers for the efficacy of anti-PD-1/PD-L1 antibodies in NSCLC. (C) 2016 International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据