Efficacy and Safety of Programmed Death-1/Programmed Death-Ligand 1 Inhibitor for Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Abstract

Objective: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of programmed death-1 (PD-1)/programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitors for the treatment of metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC). Methods: A literature search was conducted of PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library and was limited to the English literature. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published up to July 2022 were considered for inclusion. The outcomes were progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), and grade ≥ 3 treatment-related AEs (TRAE). Subgroup analysis was performed based on the PD-L1 expression status, and the differences between first- and second-line PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors were estimated. Results: We included five RCTs comprising 3584 patients in the analysis. Compared with chemotherapy alone, the use of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors as monotherapy did not significantly prolong OS [hazard ratios (HR), 0.90; 95% CI, 0.81-1.00] or PFS (HR, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.95-1.32). However, the PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor combined with chemotherapy significantly improved both OS (HR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.74-0.96) and PFS (HR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.71-0.90). Additionally, subgroup analysis showed that in mUC with PD-L1 expression ≥ 5%, treatment with the PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor alone did not reduce the risk of death. Safety analysis showed that the PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor alone did not significantly increase the incidence rates of grade ≥ 3 TRAEs. Conclusions: The results show that use of the PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor alone as first-line treatment is similar to chemotherapy in terms of both survival and response rates. However, the PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor plus chemotherapy has a significant benefit in terms of PFS or OS. Nonetheless, more RCTs are warranted to evaluate efficiency and safety in the combination regimen of chemotherapy and PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors.