Immunotherapy with anti-PD-1 or PD-L1 in advanced ovarian cancer (OC): A meta-analysis of randomized trials.

5570 Background: Immunotherapy (IO) has shown promising results in several solid tumors, including gynaecological malignancies. While PARP inhibitors and bevacizumab had deeply improved outcomes in OC, prognosis remains poor, underscoring the need for innovative treatment strategies. Anti-PD-1 and PD-L1 monoclonal antibodies have been evaluated in randomized trials across both first-line and recurrent OC settings. This meta-analysis summarizes the available evidence to assess progression-free survival (PFS) benefits from IO-based strategies. Methods: Phase II and III randomized clinical trials (RCTs) evaluating IO-based strategies using PD1 or PDL1 inhibitors published between 2019 and 2024 were identified through PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library, as well as conference proceedings. Eight trials with PFS as primary endpoint, conducted in first-line and recurrence settings, were included. Data on PFS by PD-L1 status were available in seven trials. Three trials included two experimental arms and were analysed separately. Hazard ratios (HRs), 95% confidence intervals (CIs), and PFS events were extracted for overall populations and subgroups. A random-effects model was employed for data analysis, with sensitivity analyses performed to explore outcome variability. Results: The meta-analysis included 8 trials comprising 6,205 patients. The addition of IO to chemotherapy or placebo showed no improvement in PFS (HR = 1.02, 95% CI 0.86-1.22). Subgroup analyses indicated no significant differences in PFS in first-line (HR = 0.99, 95% CI 0.78-1.26) or recurrence settings (HR= 1.07, 95% CI 0.80-1.44). In trials reporting PD-L1 status (47.5% PD-L1 positive population), IO-based therapies demonstrated a non-significant trend towards PFS improvement (HR = 0.94, 95% CI 0.77-1.13). Excluding IO-only arms yielded similar results (HR = 0.94, 95% CI 0.79-1.11). Conclusions: IO-based strategies did not provide a substantial PFS benefit in advanced OC, irrespective of disease setting or PD-L1 status. Identifying effective combination strategies and patient subgroups that may benefit from IO remains an open research question.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Published
2025-05-28
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2025.43.16_suppl.5570
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Ovarian cancer diagnosis and treatment
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
3.40
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Immunotherapy with anti-PD-1 or PD-L1 in advanced ovarian cancer (OC): A meta-analysis of randomized trials.

Gianna Tabaro, Vincenzo Canzonieri, G. Zapelloni, Anna Del Fabro et al.
2 citations
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Ovarian cancer diagnosis and treatment
3.40
article

Immunotherapy with anti-PD-1 or PD-L1 in advanced ovarian cancer (OC): A meta-analysis of randomized trials.

Gianna Tabaro, Vincenzo Canzonieri, G. Zapelloni, Anna Del Fabro, Fabio Puglisi, Serena Corsetti, Milena Sabrina Nicoloso, Elisabetta Caccin, Antonino Ditto, Michele Bartoletti, Marcella Montico, Tommaso Occhiali, Simona Scalone, Luca Martella, Nicolò Clemente, Claudio Reato, Emilio Lucia, Mattia Poletto, Riccardo Vida, Monica Rizzetto
article en
2 citations

Abstract

5570 Background: Immunotherapy (IO) has shown promising results in several solid tumors, including gynaecological malignancies. While PARP inhibitors and bevacizumab had deeply improved outcomes in OC, prognosis remains poor, underscoring the need for innovative treatment strategies. Anti-PD-1 and PD-L1 monoclonal antibodies have been evaluated in randomized trials across both first-line and recurrent OC settings. This meta-analysis summarizes the available evidence to assess progression-free survival (PFS) benefits from IO-based strategies. Methods: Phase II and III randomized clinical trials (RCTs) evaluating IO-based strategies using PD1 or PDL1 inhibitors published between 2019 and 2024 were identified through PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library, as well as conference proceedings. Eight trials with PFS as primary endpoint, conducted in first-line and recurrence settings, were included. Data on PFS by PD-L1 status were available in seven trials. Three trials included two experimental arms and were analysed separately. Hazard ratios (HRs), 95% confidence intervals (CIs), and PFS events were extracted for overall populations and subgroups. A random-effects model was employed for data analysis, with sensitivity analyses performed to explore outcome variability. Results: The meta-analysis included 8 trials comprising 6,205 patients. The addition of IO to chemotherapy or placebo showed no improvement in PFS (HR = 1.02, 95% CI 0.86-1.22). Subgroup analyses indicated no significant differences in PFS in first-line (HR = 0.99, 95% CI 0.78-1.26) or recurrence settings (HR= 1.07, 95% CI 0.80-1.44). In trials reporting PD-L1 status (47.5% PD-L1 positive population), IO-based therapies demonstrated a non-significant trend towards PFS improvement (HR = 0.94, 95% CI 0.77-1.13). Excluding IO-only arms yielded similar results (HR = 0.94, 95% CI 0.79-1.11). Conclusions: IO-based strategies did not provide a substantial PFS benefit in advanced OC, irrespective of disease setting or PD-L1 status. Identifying effective combination strategies and patient subgroups that may benefit from IO remains an open research question.

Journal of Clinical OncologyVol. 43(16_suppl)
University of Udine (IT), University of Trieste (IT), Centro di Riferimento Oncologico (IT), Istituti di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico (IT)
Openalex Percentile: Top 8%
Ovarian cancer diagnosis and treatment
3.40
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.