Comparative efficacy of PD-1 versus PD-L1 inhibitors in metastatic colorectal cancer: A real-world propensity score–matched study.
Abstract
e15599 Background: The treatment of microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H) metastatic colorectal cancers (mCRC) has evolved dramatically in the last decade with the advent of immunotherapy. Despite similar mechanisms, there remains debate regarding the efficacy of PD-L1 vs PD-1 agents in this space. Recent COMMIT results suggest inferior progression-free survival (PFS) with PD-L1 in MSI-H mCRC compared to PD-1 in comparable scenarios (KeyNote-177, CM8HW). Here, we utilize a large national database to demonstrate real-world outcomes for mCRC patients treated with PD-1 vs PD-L1 monotherapy. This highlights a potential difference in the inhibition of the programmed cell death PD-1/PD-L1 axis and contributes to the ongoing debate. Methods: We utilized the TriNetX network, a federated, multicenter, de-identified database. We evaluated adult patients with mCRC who received immunotherapy between 2013 and 2025. Cohorts were defined by first exposure to immune checkpoint inhibitors: anti–PD-1(pembrolizumab/nivolumab) vs anti–PD-L1 (durvalumab/atezolizumab), with a separate comparison vs atezolizumab only. Patients treated with CTLA-4 inhibitors were excluded. Subsequently, propensity score matching was performed for demographics, comorbidities, TNM staging, and dMMR genes. Outcomes were calculated at 3 and 5-year intervals from the index date of initial immunotherapy exposure. Time-to-event outcomes were analyzed using the Kaplan–Meier method, with differences assessed by the log-rank test and Cox proportional hazards. Results: 6235 patients were evaluated for inclusion. After propensity score matching, 1820 patients were included, with 910 patients in each cohort. Over the 5-year follow-up window, Overall survival(OS) favored PD-1 therapy: median OS was 26.4 months in the PD-1 cohort vs 18.3 months in the PD-L1 cohort, HR death = 0.84 (95% CI 0.76 - 0.92, log rank p = 0.003). Landmark survival at 3 years and 5 years also favored PD-1 inhibition over PD-L1 inhibition (41.3 vs 33.9% and 34.2% vs 22.6%, respectively). These findings were confirmed in the secondary analysis with Anti-PD-1 therapy vs Atezolizumab cohort with 547 patients in each cohort. Anti-PD-1 therapy showed improved OS at( HR = 0.73, 95% CI-0.61 - 0.86, log rank P = 0.0002) with 5-year survival probability of 34.5% vs 21.7%, respectively. Conclusions: Treatment with PD-1 monotherapy was associated with improved outcomes compared with PD-L1 monotherapy. Similar differences between PD-1 and PD-L1 blockade have been reported in other tumor types; however, comparative data in mCRC remain limited. In light of recent results from the COMMIT trial, our analysis is timely. One potential explanation is that PD-1 inhibition blocks interactions with both PD-L1 and PD-L2, whereas PD-L1 inhibitors do not disrupt PD-1/PD-L2 signaling. Further prospective studies are needed to confirm and define this difference.
Article Details
Journal Info
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
Authors (4)
Kushal Kriplani
7SUNY Downstate Health Sciences University, Brooklyn, United States
Timothy J. Brown
Simmons Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX
Udhayvir Singh Grewal
Winship Cancer Institute of Emory University, Atlanta, GA
Nicholas James Hornstein
Northwell Health Cancer Center, New York, NY