Correlation Between PD-L2 Expression and Clinical Outcome in Solid Cancer Patients: A Meta-Analysis
Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitors targeting the programmed cell death 1 (PD-1)/programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) pathway are a paradigm-shifting cancer therapy. Programmed cell death ligand 2 (PD-L2) is another ligand of PD-1, but its prognostic significance in solid cancer patients after surgery remains controversial. In this study, we aimed to reveal the prognostic implication of PD-L2 in solid tumors through a meta-analysis.
Methods: We searched PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane library for studies reporting the relationship between PD-L2 expression and prognosis or clinicopathological features in solid cancer patients after surgery from inception to January 2018, with language restricted to English. Pooled hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were determined to explore the prognostic value of PD-L2 expression. Odds ratios (ORs) were also calculated to investigate the relationship between PD-L2 expression and clinicopathological parameters.
Results: Sixteen studies incorporating 3,533 patients were included in our meta-analysis. The pooled results revealed that PD-L2 overexpression was a weak negative predictor for overall survival (OS; HR = 1.38, 95% CI = 1.05–1.81, P = 0.021), as well as a strong predictor for poor disease-free survival (DFS)/progression-free survival (PFS) (HR = 1.44, 95% CI = 1.15–1.81, P = 0.001). In subgroup analyses, high PD-L2 expression revealed an unfavorable prognostic prediction for OS in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) (HR = 1.60, 95% CI = 1.12–2.29, P = 0.011) and for DFS/PFS in HCC (HR = 1.50, 95%CI = 1.04–2.16, P = 0.031) as well as clear cell renal cell carcinoma (HR = 1.45, 95% CI = 1.03–2.03, P = 0.033). Moreover, PD-L2 expression implied a weak trend toward the presence of lymphatic metastasis (presence vs. absence, OR = 1.61, 95% CI = 0.98–2.65, P = 0.061).
Conclusion: High PD-L2 expression may promote tumor metastasis and predict unfavorable prognosis in solid cancer patients after surgery, especially in HCC.
CITE THIS COLLECTION
REFERENCES
- https://doi.org//10.1200/JCO.2014.59.4358
- https://doi.org//10.1634/theoncologist.2016-0189
- https://doi.org//10.1016/S0140-6736(16)32517-X
- https://doi.org//10.1016/S0140-6736(16)32455-2
- https://doi.org//10.1038/85330
- https://doi.org//10.1097/MD.0000000000006369
- https://doi.org//10.1172/JCI43656
- https://doi.org//10.1080/2162402X.2017.1390641
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.humpath.2017.10.029
- https://doi.org//10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-16-1761
- https://doi.org//10.1158/2326-6066.CIR-15-0046
- https://doi.org//10.4143/crt.2016.066
- https://doi.org//10.1186/s40880-017-0226-3
- https://doi.org//10.1080/2162402X.2017.1358332
SHARE
Usage metrics
Read the peer-reviewed publication

AUTHORS (4)
- HYHuayu YangXZXiaoxiang ZhouLSLejia SunYMYilei Mao