The efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors on low PD-L1 cervical cancer: A meta-analysis.

Background and Aims: The effectiveness of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in low programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression in cervical cancer (CC) patients remains unknown. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of ICIs in low PD-L1 expression CC patients. Methods: The study is an individual patient data (IPD)-based meta-analysis. IPD were compiled through KMSubtraction and IPDfromKM methodologies from high-quality randomized clinical trials and single-arm studies which reported overall survival (OS) or progression-free survival (PFS) stratified by PD-L1 expression. Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox regression analysis were employed to evaluate the survival benefits of ICIs. Results: A total of eight studies and 1110 cases were included in the analysis. Within the low PD-L1 expression subgroup, ICI combination therapy, but not ICI monotherapy, demonstrated significant OS benefits over non-ICI treatment (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.61, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.36-1.04, p = 0.06). Concerning PFS, ICI monotherapy was associated with a negative effect compared to non-ICI treatment (HR = 4.59, 95% CI: 2.32-9.07, p < 0.001). Notably, both OS and PFS outcomes were unfavorable for ICI monotherapy compared to both non-ICI and ICI combination therapy in the combined positive score <1 subgroup (OS: HR = 2.60, 95% CI: 1.31-5.16, p = 0.008; PFS: HR = 7.59, 95% CI: 3.53-16.31, p < 0.001). Conclusion: In patients with CC and low PD-L1 expression, ICI monotherapy may not be considered as the optimal treatment strategy when compared to non-ICI treatment or ICI combination therapy. Registration: CRD42023395103.

The Construction and Validation of Nomogram to Predict the Prognosis with Small-Cell Lung Cancer Followed Surgery.

This study constructed and validated a prognostic model to evaluate the survival of small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) patients following surgery, and shed light on the strategy of postoperative radiotherapy. A total of 882 patients from Shanghai Pulmonary Hospital and the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results database after lung resection were selected. Multivariable Cox analysis was used to identify the indicators affecting long-term survival in patients. A nomogram was constructed to predict the prognosis of eligible patients. Indices of concordance (C-index) was used to access the predictive ability of cancer-specific survival (CSS) for the prognostic model. CSS discrimination in the prognostic model was comparable in the training and validation cohorts (C-index = 0.637[NORAD-T], 0.660[NORAD-V], 0.656[RAD] and 0.627[our hospital], respectively. Stratification based on the cutoff value of the nomogram yielded low- and high-risk subgroups in four cohorts. For patients in the high-risk group, postoperative radiotherapy was considered a survival-promoting strategy (unadjusted HR 0.641, 95% CI 0.469-0.876, p = 0.0046). In the low-risk group, however, the implementation of radiotherapy barely had an influence on CSS. In conclusion, the nomogram we constructed and validated could predict the prognosis of SCLC patients followed surgery and identify high-risk patients who were likely to benefit from postoperative radiotherapy.

A Nomogram to Predict Long-Term Survival Outcomes of Patients Who Undergo Pneumonectomy for Non-small Cell Lung Cancer With Stage I-IIIB.

Background: In this study, we aim to establish a nomogram to predict the prognosis of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients with stage I-IIIB disease after pneumonectomy. Methods: Patients selected from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER, N = 2,373) database were divided into two cohorts, namely a training cohort (SEER-T, N = 1,196) and an internal validation cohort (SEER-V, N = 1,177). Two cohorts were dichotomized into low- and high-risk subgroups by the optimal risk prognostic score (PS). The model was validated by indices of concordance (C-index) and calibration plots. Kaplan-Meier analysis and the log-rank tests were used to compare survival curves between the groups. The primary observational endpoint was cancer-specific survival (CSS). Results: The nomogram comprised six factors as independent prognostic indictors; it significantly distinguished between low- and high-risk groups (all P < 0.05). The unadjusted 5-year CSS rates of high-risk and low-risk groups were 33 and 60% (SEER-T), 34 and 55% (SEER-V), respectively; the C-index of this nomogram in predicting CSS was higher than that in the 8th TNM staging system (SEER-T, 0.629 vs. 0.584, P < 0.001; SEER-V, 0.609 vs. 0.576, P < 0.001). In addition, the PS might be a significant negative indictor on CSS of patients with white patients [unadjusted hazard ration (HR) 1.008, P < 0.001], black patients (unadjusted HR 1.007, P < 0.001), and Asian or Pacific Islander (unadjusted HR 1.008, P = 0.008). In cases with squamous cell carcinoma (unadjusted HR 1.008, P < 0.001) or adenocarcinoma (unadjusted HR 1.008, P < 0.001), PS also might be a significant risk factor. Conclusions: For post-pneumonectomy NSCLC patients, the nomogram may predict their survival with acceptable accuracy and further distinguish high-risk patients from low-risk patients.

Clinical and Pathologic Feature of Patients With Early Versus Late Active Antibody-Mediated Rejection After Kidney Transplantation: A Single-Center Experience.

OBJECTIVE: Active antibody-mediated rejection (aABMR), particularly late aABMR, remains a major challenge for long-term renal allograft survival. This single-center retrospective study aimed to compare clinical features between early vs late aABMR and to identify risk factors for allograft failure among patients with aABMR. METHOD: Forty-one patients diagnosed with aABMR at our hospital were included and were divided into 2 groups: early aABMR (≤6 months; n = 10) vs late aABMR (>6 months; n = 31) based on the time from transplant to diagnosis. Their clinical and pathologic data were compared. This study was performed in compliance with the Helsinki Congress and the Declaration of Istanbul. RESULTS: Of 10 patients with early aABMR, none had allograft failure, whereas 8 of 31 patients with late aABMR had developed allograft failure at the time of follow-up (25.8%). At the time of biopsy, patients with early aABMR had higher positive grade in urine occult blood test than patients with late aABMR (P = .01); however, the late aABMR group displayed more intensive interstitial fibrosis and tubular atrophy (P = .03) and more frequent HLA-DQ-type donor-specific antibodies. Interestingly, donor-specific antibody conversion from positive to negative was not associated with C4d grade but was correlated with time from transplant to biopsy. Multivariate Cox regression analysis indicated that high levels of serum creatinine or proteinuria and concomitant T-cell-mediated rejection were independent risk factors for allograft failure in patients with aABMR. CONCLUSION: These data not only confirm that early aABMR has better clinical outcomes than late aABMR but highlight the importance of early diagnostic biopsy and early therapeutic interventions in ABMR, particularly in patients with high levels of serum creatinine or proteinuria in the early posttransplant phase.