PD-L1 Immunohistochemistry Comparability and Their Correlation with Clinical Characteristics in NSCLC

Wu, Chiao‐En; Chang, Ching‐Fu; Kou-Sheng, Liao; Chiang, Ju; Lee, Shih‐Wei; Chiu, Yu-Chi

doi:10.1155/2020/3286139

Cited by 5 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the pan-cancer analysis of ICOS expression in this study, we also found that ICOS was expressed at lower levels in lung tissues. In addition, low ICOS expression indicated high-grade NSCLC progression in the T stage, while high PD-L1 expression indicated high-grade in the N stage, which is consistent with one report of 144 patients with lung cancer, which showed that PD-L1 expression in NSCLC was associated with a higher N stage, but not the T and M stages [30].…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

The Expression and Prognostic Significance of ICOS in NSCLC Integrated Pan-Cancer and Multi-Omics Analyses

Chen,

Yan,

Hong

et al. 2024

Int. J. Med. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Inducible co-stimulator (ICOS) shows great potential in the regulation of innate and adaptive immunity. However, previous studies of ICOS have often been limited to one or two levels. Methods: Using the data from the online database, the immunohistochemistry, and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays, we investigated the role of ICOS / PD-L1 on patients with NSCLC at the mRNA, protein, and serum levels. Results: Our data revealed that unlike most solid tumors, the mRNA expression of ICOS was down-regulated in NSCLC. In addition, our data also showed that mRNA expression levels in ICOS are negatively associated with poor clinicopathologic grading but positively associated with better prognostic outcomes and higher Tregs infiltration level. Immunohistochemistry showed that ICOS correlated negatively with the T stage; while PD-L1 levels correlated positively with the N stage and FOXP3 levels. Serological biomarker analysis showed that patients with NSCLC had lower sICOS levels, which increased significantly post-surgery, and combined sICOS and sPD-L1 diagnosis improved efficacy and accuracy of disease diagnosis. Conclusion: Our findings support that ICOS suggests lower pathological staging and better prognosis. ICOS is a potential diagnostic and prognostic biomarker for NSCLC.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

The Expression and Prognostic Significance of ICOS in NSCLC Integrated Pan-Cancer and Multi-Omics Analyses

Chen,

Yan,

Hong

et al. 2024

Int. J. Med. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“… 14 In non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), PD-L1 levels were correlated with N, but not T or M stage. 15 These data suggest that, in certain types of tumor, PD-L1 level may be related to tumor stage, and could be more significant only in certain stages. Whether PD-L1 expression in different tumor stages can be applied to the evaluation of immunotherapy warrants further study.…”

Section: Pd-l1 Expression In Different Tumor Stagesmentioning

confidence: 80%

PD-L1: expression regulation

Zhou

Wang

et al. 2023

Blood Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1), expressed on the surface of tumor cells, can bind to programmed cell death-1 (PD-1) on T cells. The interaction of PD-1 and PD-L1 can inhibit T-cell responses by decreasing T-cell activity and accelerating their apoptosis. Various cancers express high levels of PD-L1 and exploit PD-L1/PD-1 signaling to evade T-cell immunity, and immunotherapies targeting the PD-1/PD-L1 axis have been shown to exert remarkable anti-tumor effects; however, not all tumor patients benefit from these therapies. Therefore, study of the mechanisms regulating PD-L1 expression are imperative. In this review, we explore regulation of PD-L1 expression in the contexts of gene transcription, signaling pathways, histone modification and remodeling, microRNAs, long noncoding RNAs, and post-translational modification. Current developments in studies of agents that block PD-L1 and correlations between immunotherapies targeting PD-1/PD-L1 and PD-L1 expression are also summarized. Our review will assist in understanding of PD-L1 expression regulation and discusses the implications of reported findings in cancer diagnosis and immunotherapy.

show abstract

“…Third, pathology‐based immune cell PD‐L1 scoring has repeatedly shown poor reproducibility in SCLC, thus restricting PD‐L1’s utility as a biomarker in SCLC [ 28 , 29 ]. Fourthly, PD‐L1 detection reagents and platforms are also diverse to date, with pembrolizumab and nivolumab using Dako22C3 and Dako28‐2 PD‐L1 detection reagents respectively, and atezolizumab and durvalumab using SP263 detection antibodies, and consistency studies of detection antibodies and platforms urgently need to be conducted [ 30 ]. Therefore, the use of PD‐L1 as a biomarker still faces many challenges, and there are no criteria for determining a positive cut‐off value for PD‐L1 expression.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Which Is More Suitable for First‐Line Treatment of Extensive‐Stage Small Cell Lung Cancer, PD‐L1 Inhibitors Versus PD‐1 Inhibitors? A Systematic Review and Network Meta‐Analysis

Liu,

Yu,

Feng

et al. 2024

Clinical Respiratory J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundIn this network meta‐analysis (NMA), the efficiency and safety of PD‐1 inhibitors + chemotherapy and PD‐L1 inhibitors + chemotherapy were compared in the first‐line therapy of patients with extensive‐stage small cell lung cancer (ES‐SCLC).MethodsWe searched research databases, conference abstracts, and trial registries and subsequently chose relevant studies and extracted dates. The NMA was conducted to estimate the efficiency and safety of the PD‐1 inhibitors + chemotherapy and PD‐L1 inhibitors + chemotherapy on overall survival (OS), progression‐free survival (PFS), overall remission rate (ORR), and adverse events (AEs). Studies were assessed for quality. Subgroup analyses were used to evaluate study heterogeneity.ResultsWe included six randomized trials with a total of 3163 patients. Direct comparisons showed that patients who received either PD‐1 inhibitors + chemotherapy (HR: 0.71, 95% CI: 0.57–0.87) or PD‐L1 inhibitors + chemotherapy (HR: 0.74, 0.61–0.89) demonstrated significantly longer OS than those who received placebo + chemotherapy. The results of the NMA showed that no significant differences in OS (HR 0.96 95% CI: 0.72–1.3), PFS (HR 0.83, 95% CI: 0.51–1.4), and ORR (OR 1.3 95% CI: 0.66–2.5) were observed for PD‐1 inhibitors + chemotherapy compared with PD‐L1 inhibitors + chemotherapy, but the Bayesian ranking revealed that patients receiving PD‐1 inhibitors + chemotherapy tended to have longer OS, PFS benefit, and better treatment response than patients receiving PD‐L1 inhibitors + chemotherapy. In terms of safety, no significant difference was observed in their safety profiles.ConclusionIn comparison to placebo + chemotherapy, PD‐L1 inhibitors + chemotherapy and PD‐1 inhibitors + chemotherapy significantly improved survival for ES‐SCLC. According to the available data, PD‐L1 inhibitors + chemotherapy and PD‐1 inhibitors + chemotherapy had equivalent efficacy and safety; however, the level of evidence of this type of comparison is limited.

show abstract

PD-L1 Immunohistochemistry Comparability and Their Correlation with Clinical Characteristics in NSCLC

Cited by 5 publications

References 29 publications

The Expression and Prognostic Significance of ICOS in NSCLC Integrated Pan-Cancer and Multi-Omics Analyses

The Expression and Prognostic Significance of ICOS in NSCLC Integrated Pan-Cancer and Multi-Omics Analyses

PD-L1: expression regulation

Which Is More Suitable for First‐Line Treatment of Extensive‐Stage Small Cell Lung Cancer, PD‐L1 Inhibitors Versus PD‐1 Inhibitors? A Systematic Review and Network Meta‐Analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About