Disease Markers
Volume 2020 (2020), Article ID 1817931, 12 pages
https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/1817931

Research Article

Prognostic and Clinicopathological Significance of PD-L1 in Patients with Cholangiocarcinoma: A Meta-Analysis

Qinfen Xie,1,2 Lidong Wang,² and Shusen Zheng1,2

¹Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou 310058, China
²Department of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Shulan (Hangzhou) Hospital Affiliated to Zhejiang Shuren University Shulan International Medical College, Hangzhou 310000, China

Correspondence should be addressed to Qinfen Xie; qinfen.xie@shulan.com and Shusen Zheng; zyzss@zju.edu.cn

Received 10 September 2019; Revised 12 May 2020; Accepted 30 June 2020; Published 16 July 2020

Academic Editor: Michele Malaguarnera

Copyright © 2020 Qinfen Xie et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract.

Background. In recent years, there is growing literature on the prognostic significance of programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) in cholangiocarcinoma (CCA); however, data have been conflicting. Therefore, the objective of this study was to assess the correlation between PD-L1 and prognosis in CCA through meta-analysis. Methods. Published studies were retrieved from the Web of Science, PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library up to April 17, 2020. The relationships between PD-L1 expression and survival outcomes were assessed using hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results. Eighteen studies consisting of 2012 patients were included. Overexpression of PD-L1 was significantly associated with worse overall survival (OS) (, , ) but not with poor disease-free survival (DFS) (, , ) in CCA. Moreover, PD-L1 was associated with low differentiation (, , ) and higher pN stage (, , ) but not with sex, TNM stage, vascular invasion, perineural invasion, age, or tumor size. Conclusion. High PD-L1 expression was associated with worse OS, poor differentiation, and higher pN stage in patients with CCA. PD-L1 could be a potential prognostic marker in CCA.

1. Introduction

Cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) is the second most frequent type of primary liver cancer, with aggressive nature and a high mortality rate, accounting for 20% of liver-related deaths [1]. The incidence of CCA is increasing during the past decades in Western countries, and the 5-year survival rate is approximately 10% [2, 3]. Surgical resection is the definitive treatment option for CCA; however, recurrence remains high and maintains a poor prognosis [4, 5]. Emerging treatment options, including targeted therapies and immunotherapy with checkpoint inhibitors, are in clinical trials and provide personalized therapeutic strategies for patients with CCA [5]. Efficient prognostic biomarkers are still lacking for CCA; therefore, a reliable prognostic marker is needed for optimal therapeutic strategy selection [6].

In recent years, the tumor microenvironment and immune milieu have attracted much attention [7]. The immune checkpoint molecules, programmed cell death-1 (PD-1) and its ligand programmed death-ligand-1 (PD-L1), regulate immune responses in cancer development [8]. Activation of the PD-1/PD-L1 axis results in immune suppression by inhibition of immune cells and secretion of certain cytokines [9]. Recent evidence also showed the prognostic value of PD-L1 in different types of cancers [10]. The prognostic role of PD-L1 in CCA has also been investigated; however, data were inconsistent [11–28]. Therefore, we conducted a meta-analysis to explore the prognostic and clinicopathologic roles of PD-L1 in patients with CCA.

2. Materials and Methods

This meta-analysis was conducted based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement [29]. Ethical approval and patient consent were not performed because all data collected were from previously published studies.

2.1. Literature Search

PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Embase were reviewed till April 17, 2020. The search terms used were “PD-L1” or “programmed death ligand 1” or “PDL1” or “B7-H1” or “CD274”, and “bile duct neoplasms” or “cholangiocarcinoma” or “bile duct cancer”. The reference lists in relevant studies were also examined for potential inclusions.

2.2. Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria

The criteria for inclusion were (1) patients histologically diagnosed with CCA; (2) PD-L1 expression detected by immunohistochemistry (IHC); (3) studies reporting the relationship between PD-L1 and survival outcomes including overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS); (4) sufficient data available for the calculation of hazard ratios (HRs), odds ratios (ORs), and 95% confidence intervals (CIs); and (5) studies published in English.

The exclusion criteria were (1) conference abstracts, case reports, reviews, or letters; (2) studies with insufficient data for analysis; (3) animal studies; and (4) studies recruited overlapping patients.

2.3. Data Extraction

Two independent investigators (Q.X. and L.W.) collected data from the included studies and any discrepancies were settled by discussion with a senior investigator (S.Z.). The following baseline information was extracted: author, year, study country, study design, sample size, treatment method, follow-up, survival outcomes, positive rate of PD-L1 expression, and detection method. Detailed information on PD-L1 antibodies used for IHC (specie, clone, dilution, source, and cutoff value) was also extracted. The HR and 95% CIs of OS and DFS were obtained directly if reported or were calculated by Tierney’s method [30].

2.4. Quality Assessment

The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) was applied to evaluate the quality of eligible studies [31]. The NOS evaluated each study in three aspects. The score ranges from 0-9, and studies with NOS scores of ≥6 are considered high-quality studies.

2.5. Statistical Analysis

The relationships between PD-L1, OS, and DFS were assessed by combining HRs and 95% CIs. Chi-squared tests and inconsistency index () statistics were used to examine heterogeneity. In the presence of significant heterogeneity (), a random-effect (REM) model was used; otherwise, a fixed-effect model (FEM) was applied. ORs and 95% CIs were used as effective sizes to assess the association between PD-L1 and clinicopathological features. Publication bias was tested using Begg’s and Egger’s tests. A was considered to be statistically significant. All statistical analyses were conducted using Stata version 12.0 (StataCorp. 2011. Stata Statistical Software: Release 12. College Station, TX: StataCorp LP.).

3. Results

3.1. Study Characteristics

The initial literature search identified 259 studies. According to the selection criteria, a total of 18 studies [11–28] with 2012 patients were eventually included in the meta-analysis (Figure 1). The basic characteristics of the eligible studies are shown in Table 1. Seven studies were conducted in China [13, 15, 16, 21, 22, 27, 28], three in Japan [18, 24, 25], two in Korea [11, 20], two in Germany [19, 26], two in Germany [14, 17], and one in Thailand [23] and UK [12]. One study was of prospective design [12], and 17 were retrospective cohort studies [11, 13–28]. The sample size ranged from 26 to 320. All included studies had a NOS score of ≥6. Detailed information on the primary antibody used for PD-L1 is summarized in Table 2. All included studies used IHC to detect PD-L1 expression. The cutoff values to stratify high- and low expression of PD-L1 were different, including 1%, 5%, H-score 5, score 3, and 2+.

Figure 1: Flow chart of literature search and study selection.

Table 1: Characteristics of the studies included in the meta-analysis.

Author
Year
Country
No. of patients
Ethnicity
Sex (M/F)
Tumor location
Follow-up (months)
Median (range)
Study design
Treatment
Survival outcome
PD-L1 (+)
(%)
NOS score

Ahn, S.
2019
Korea
183
Asian
122/61
eCCA
27.2
Retrospective
Surgery
OS, DFS
31 (16.9)
7

Arkenau, H. T.
2018
UK
26
Caucasian
8/18
CCA
6.4 (4.1-13.2)
Prospective
Targeted therapy + immunotherapy
OS, DFS
12 (46.2)
8

Dong, Z. T.
2020
China
125
Asian
58/77
iCCA
16 (5-63)
Retrospective
Surgery
OS, DFS
52 (41.6)
7

Gani, F.
2016
USA
54
Caucasian
17/37
iCCA
NR
Retrospective
Surgery
OS
39 (72.2)
6

Gou, M. M.
2019
China
30
Asian
18/12
CCA
To Sep 2018
Retrospective
Immunotherapy
DFS
11 (36.6)
7

Jing, C. Y.
2019
China
153
Asian
NR
iCCA
47.5 (1-88.4)
Retrospective
Surgery
OS
43 (28.1)
7

Kim, R.
2018
USA
44
Caucasian
23/21
eCCA
NR
Retrospective
Surgery
OS
10 (22.7)
6

Kitano, Y.
2020
Japan
177
Asian
115/62
CCA
78.7
Retrospective
Surgery
OS
54 (30.5)
6

Kriegsmann, M.
2019
Germany
170
Caucasian
109/61
CCA
NR
Retrospective
Surgery
OS
19 (11.1)
6

Lim, Y. J.
2015
Korea
83
Asian
61/22
eCCA
27
Retrospective
Surgery
OS, DFS
56 (83)
7

Lu, J. C.
2019
China
320
Asian
19/129
iCCA
To Oct 2016
Retrospective
Surgery
OS, DFS
99 (30.9)
7

Ma, K.
2017
China
70
Asian
38/32
eCCA
To Mar 2015
Retrospective
Surgery
OS
30 (42.9)
7

Sangkhamanon, S.
2017
Thailand
46
Asian
33/13
CCA
NR
Retrospective
Surgery
OS
18 (39.1)
6

Tamai, K.
2014
Japan
91
Asian
62/29
eCCA
NR
Retrospective
Surgery
OS
77 (84.6)
6

Ueno, T.
2018
Japan
117
Asian
93/24
eCCA
27 (0-189)
Retrospective
Surgery
OS
10 (8.5)
7

Walter, D.
2017
Germany
69
Caucasian
50/19
eCCA
23 (0-100)
Retrospective
Surgery
OS
8 (11.6)
7

Yu, F.
2019
China
62
Asian
41/21
eCCA
NR
Retrospective
Surgery
OS, DFS
20 (32.3)
6

Zhu, Y.
2018
China
192
Asian
115/77
iCCA
24 (0.4-85)
Retrospective
Surgery
OS, DFS
34 (17.7)
7

CCA: cholangiocarcinoma; eCCA: extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma; iCCA: intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma; NR: not reported; OS: overall survival; DFS: disease-free survival; NOS: Newcastle-Ottawa scale. CCA includes iCCA and eCCA.

Table 2: Immunohistochemical technique used in the studies included in the meta-analysis.

Author
Year
Detection method
Primary antibody
Source
Cut-off value

Antibody
Specie
Clone
Dilution

Ahn, S.
2019
IHC
Anti-PD-L1
Mouse, MAB
22C3
1 : 100
Dako, Carpinteria, CA, USA
1%

Arkenau, H. T.
2018
IHC
Anti-PD-L1
Mouse, MAB
22C3
NR
Agilent, Carpinteria, CA
1%

Dong, Z. T.
2020
IHC
Anti-PD-L1
MAB
NR
NR
Cell Signaling Technology, Inc. Danvers, MA, USA
5%

Gani, F.
2016
IHC
Anti-PD-L1
Mouse, MAB
5H1
NR
NR
5%

Gou, M. M.
2019
IHC
Anti-PD-L1
NR
NR
NR
NR
1%

Jing, C. Y.
2019
IHC
Anti-PD-L1
Rabbit, MAB
E1L3N
1 : 200
Cell Signaling Technology, MA, USA
5%

Kim, R.
2018
IHC
Anti-PD-L1
Mouse, MAB
5H1
NR
NR
1%

Kitano, Y.
2020
IHC
Anti-PD-L1
Rabbit, MAB
E1L3N
1 : 200
Cell Signaling Technology, Tokyo, Japan
5%

Kriegsmann, M.
2019
IHC
Anti-PD-L1
NR
SP263
NR
Roche AG, Rotkreuz, Switzerland
1%

Lim, Y. J.
2015
IHC
Anti-PD-L1
Rabbit, MAB
E1L3N
1 : 100
Cell Signaling Technology, Danvers, MA, USA
H-score 5

Lu, J. C.
2019
IHC
Anti-PD-L1
Rabbit, MAB
SP142
1 : 100
GeneTech Co. Ltd., Shanghai, China
5%

Ma, K.
2017
IHC
Anti-PD-L1
Rabbit, MAB
NR
1 : 250
Abcam, Cambridge, MA, USA
5%

Sangkhamanon, S.
2017
IHC
Anti-PD-L1
NR
NR
1 : 1000
Roche Diagnostic GmbH, USA
1%

Tamai, K.
2014
IHC
Anti-CD274
Rabbit, PAB
NR
NR
Abcam, Cambridge, MA, USA
++

Ueno, T.
2018
IHC
Anti-PD-L1
NR
NR
NR
NR
5%

Walter, D.
2017
IHC
Anti-PD-L1
Rabbit, MAB
E1L3N
1 : 50
Cell Signaling Technology, Danvers, MA, USA
Score 3

Yu, F.
2019
IHC
Anti-PD-L1
Rabbit, MAB
E1L3N
1 : 200
Cell Signaling Technology, Danvers, MA, USA
Score 3

Zhu, Y.
2018
IHC
Anti-PD-L1
Rabbit, MAB
SP142
1 : 50
Spring Bioscience, Inc., CA, USA
5%

MAB: monoclonal antibody; IHC: immunohistochemistry; NR: not reported; PAB: polyclonal antibody.

3.2. Prognostic Value of PD-L1 in OS, DFS, and Subgroup Analysis

Seventeen studies [11–14, 16–28] with a total of 1982 patients reported a correlation between PD-L1 and OS. The pooled HR and 95% CI suggested that overexpression of PD-L1 was significantly correlated with worse OS (, , ) in patients with CCA (Figure 2; Table 3). For DFS, a total of 7 studies [11, 12, 15, 20, 21, 27, 28] with 896 patients provided the relevant data. The forest plot (Figure 3) showed that PD-L1 expression was not significantly correlated with DFS (, , ) (Table 3). To further investigate the source of heterogeneity, subgroup analysis stratified by ethnicity (Caucasian and Asian), tumor location (iCCA, eCCA, and CCA), and treatment (surgery and nonsurgery) was performed for OS and DFS. For OS, PD-L1 overexpression remained a prognostic factor for patients of Caucasian (, , ) and Asian (, , ) ethnicity; and for those receiving surgery (, , ) (Table 3). Notably, regarding tumor location, high PD-L1 expression was a prognostic factor for patients with eCCA (, , ) and CCA including iCCA and eCCA (, , ). However, elevated PD-L1 expression did not correlate with worse OS in patients with iCCA (, , ) (Table 3). For DFS, the subgroup analysis indicated that PD-L1 overexpression had no significant prognostic value regardless of ethnicity, treatment method, or tumor location (Table 3).

Figure 2: Forest plots for the association between PD-L1 expression and overall survival.

Table 3: Subgroup analysis of the prognostic value of PD-L1 in OS and DFS in CCA.

Subgroup factors
No. of studies
No. of patients
HR (95% CI)

Effects model
Heterogeneity

(%)

Overall survival

    Total
17
1982
1.58 (1.30-1.92)
<0.001
REM
65.7
<0.001

Ethnicity

    Caucasian
5
363
2.14 (1.52-3.02)
<0.001
FEM
11.8
0.338

    Asian
12
1619
1.49 (1.20-1.84)
<0.001
REM
70.7
<0.001

Treatment

    Surgery
16
1956
1.61 (1.32-1.95)
<0.001
REM
67.0
<0.001

    Nonsurgery
1
26
0.70 (0.19-2.60)
0.595
—
—
—

Tumor location

    iCCA
5
844
1.31 (0.88-1.95)
0.180
REM
76.9
0.002

    eCCA
8
719
1.71 (1.25-2.36)
<0.001
REM
63.1
0.008

    CCA
4
419
1.98 (1.47-2.65)
<0.001
FEM
44.2
0.146

Disease-free survival

    Total
7
896
1.03 (0.68-1.55)
0.895
REM
72.6
0.001

Ethnicity

    Caucasian
1
26
1.13 (0.55-2.34)
0.742
—
—
—

    Asian
6
870
1.00 (0.62-1.61)
0.991
REM
77.2
0.001

Treatment

    Surgery
5
840
0.97 (0.56-1.69)
0.911
REM
81.7
<0.001

    Non-surgery
2
56
1.12 (0.67-1.85)
0.667
FEM
0
0.965

Tumor location

    iCCA
2
512
1.02 (0.36-2.92)
0.972
REM
92.2
<0.001

    eCCA
3
328
0. (0.40-2.03)
0.800
REM
77.1
0.013

    CCA
2
56
1.12 (0.67-1.85)
0.667
FEM
0
0.965

FEM: fixed-effects model; REM: random-effects model.

Figure 3: Forest plots for the association between PD-L1 expression and disease-free survival.

3.3. PD-L1 and Clinicopathological Characteristics of CCA

Thirteen studies [11, 13, 16, 18, 19, 21–28] investigated the relationship between PD-L1 and the following eight clinicopathological factors: sex (male vs. female), tumor differentiation (poor vs. well/moderate), pN stage (III+IV vs. I+II), TNM stage (III+IV vs. I+II), vascular invasion (yes vs. no), perineural invasion (yes vs. no), age (>60 vs. ≤60), and tumor size (>5 cm vs. ≤5 cm). As shown in Figure 4, high PD-L1 expression was correlated with poor differentiation (, , ) and higher pN stage (, , ). However, no significant correlation was found between PD-L1 and sex (, , ), TNM stage (, , ), vascular invasion (, , ), perineural invasion (, , ), age (, , ), and tumor size (, , ).

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

(e)

(f)

(g)

(h)

Figure 4: Forest plots of ORs for the association between PD-L1 expression and (a) sex (male vs. female), (b) tumor differentiation (poor vs. well/moderate), (c) pN stage (III+IV vs. I+II), (d) TNM stage (III+IV vs. I+II), (e) vascular invasion (yes vs. no), (f) perineural invasion (yes vs. no), (g) age (>60 vs. ≤60), and (h) tumor size (>5 cm vs. ≤5 cm).

3.4. Publication Bias

Begg’s funnel plot and Egger’s tests were applied to evaluate the publication bias in this meta-analysis. There was no obvious publication bias for OS (Begg’s test of , Egger’s test of ) or DFS (Begg’s test of , Egger’s test of ).

4. Discussion

CCA is an aggressive cancer, and most patients present at an advanced stage at the time of diagnosis [32, 33]. The current meta-analysis containing 18 studies with 2012 patients showed that high PD-L1 expression was a significant prognostic factor for low OS (). Particularly, the mortality risk of patients with CCA with high PD-L1 expression increased by 58% compared with that of patients with low PD-L1 expression. PD-L1 expression was not significantly correlated with DFS. In addition, we found that PD-L1 was positively associated with poor differentiation and higher pN stage in CCA. Generally, these results demonstrated that PD-L1 overexpression was associated with invasive clinical features and suggested poorer prognosis of CCA.

The tumor microenvironment in CCA consists of cancer cells, stromal cells, and various immune cells including CCA cells, cancer-associated fibroblasts, tumor-associated macrophages, tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes, and CD8+ cytotoxic T lymphocytes [34]. PD-1 is expressed on B cells, activated CD4+ and CD8+ T cells, and dendritic cells [35]. PD-L1 is a ligand of PD-1 and is expressed on different cell types [36]. Targeting PD-1/PD-L1 is a new strategy for cancer immunotherapy [37]. Recent studies showed that nivolumab (a PD-1 inhibitor) showed considerable safety in patients with metastatic CCA [15]. PD-L1 is mainly expressed by intertumoral immune cells in CCA [38]. Thus, the overexpression of PD-L1 may lead to immune tolerance in the tumor environment and result in tumor progression. This could be a possible mechanism for the correlation between PD-L1 elevation and poor differentiation in CCA.

Recent studies have demonstrated that PD-L1 overexpression is associated with unfavorable prognosis in various types of cancer [39, 40]. A recent meta-analysis showed that high expression of PD-L1 was significantly associated with a poor OS (, , ) in colorectal cancer [41]. Another meta-analysis including 13 studies also demonstrated that tumor cell PD-L1 expression was correlated with poor OS (, , ) in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma [42]. These findings were consistent with the results of this study. Notably, in the current meta-analysis, we included studies using the IHC method to detect PD-L1. The antibodies used for PD-L1 and cutoff values vary among the included studies, which may result in heterogeneity. However, we failed to observe a significant prognostic role of PD-L1 in DFS in patients with CCA. This negative result may be due to the limited sample size, wherein only 7 studies with 896 patients were included for DFS analysis.

Notably, several limitations of this study should be acknowledged. First, the cutoff values of PD-L1 varied in the included studies (Table 2), which may introduce heterogeneity. Further investigations used uniform antibody and a cut-off value of PD-L1 are needed. Second, only one included study was a prospective trial, and the remaining were retrospective studies. Therefore, high-quality prospective studies are still needed. Third, some HRs and 95% CIs were calculated according to survival curves, which may not be as precise as the original data. Fourth, the sample was relatively small. Only 2012 patients were enrolled and most patients were of Asian ethnicity. More studies recruiting patients of diverse ethnicities were needed to verify the results of this meta-analysis. Because of these limitations, well-designed large cohort studies or randomized controlled trials may be recommended to confirm our findings.

5. Conclusions

Our study indicates that PD-L1 was associated with worse OS, poor differentiation, and higher pN stage in patients with CCA. PD-L1 could be a potential prognostic marker for CCA.

Data Availability

The data used to support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon request.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest regarding the publication of this article.

Authors’ Contributions

Q.X. and L.W. collected and analyzed the data and wrote the paper; S.Z. analyzed the data; Q.X. and L.W. conceived and designed this study, analyzed the data, and wrote the paper; and all authors reviewed the paper. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Acknowledgments

This study was supported by the Medical and Health Science and Technology Program of Zhejiang Province (2019RC076).

References

G. Lendvai, T. Szekerczés, I. Illyés et al., “Cholangiocarcinoma: classification, histopathology and molecular carcinogenesis,” Pathology & Oncology Research, vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 3–15, 2020.

M. M. Kirstein and A. Vogel, “Epidemiology and risk factors of cholangiocarcinoma,” Visceral Medicine, vol. 32, no. 6, pp. 395–400, 2016.

A. Bergquist and E. von Seth, “Epidemiology of cholangiocarcinoma,” Best Practice & Research Clinical Gastroenterology, vol. 29, no. 2, pp. 221–232, 2015.

M. N. Mavros, K. P. Economopoulos, V. G. Alexiou, and T. M. Pawlik, “Treatment and prognosis for patients with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma systematic review and meta-analysis,” JAMA Surgery, vol. 149, no. 6, pp. 565–574, 2014.

M. H. Squires, I. Woelfel, J. M. Cloyd, and T. M. Pawlik, “Emerging treatment options for cholangiocarcinoma,” Expert Opinion on Orphan Drugs, vol. 6, no. 9, pp. 527–536, 2018.

C. Saengboonmee, K. Sawanyawisuth, Y. Chamgramol, and S. Wongkham, “Prognostic biomarkers for cholangiocarcinoma and their clinical implications,” Expert Review of Anticancer Therapy, vol. 18, no. 6, pp. 579–592, 2018.

J. Paillet, G. Kroemer, and J. G. Pol, “Immune contexture of cholangiocarcinoma,” Current Opinion in Gastroenterology, vol. 36, no. 2, pp. 70–76, 2020.

T. Okazaki and T. Honjo, “PD-1 and PD-1 ligands: from discovery to clinical application,” International Immunology, vol. 19, no. 7, pp. 813–824, 2007.

B. Li, M. VanRoey, C. Wang, T. H. T. Chen, A. Korman, and K. Jooss, “Anti-programmed death-1 synergizes with granulocyte macrophage colony-stimulating factor-secreting tumor cell immunotherapy providing therapeutic benefit to mice with established tumors,” Clinical Cancer Research, vol. 15, no. 5, pp. 1623–1634, 2009.

X. Zhu and J. Lang, “Soluble PD-1 and PD-L1: predictive and prognostic significance in cancer,” Oncotarget, vol. 8, no. 57, pp. 97671–97682, 2017.

S. Ahn, Y. Lee, J. W. Kim et al., “Programmed cell death ligand-1 (PD-L1) expression in extrahepatic biliary tract cancers: a comparative study using 22C3, SP263 and E1L3N anti-PD-L1 antibodies,” Histopathology, vol. 75, no. 4, pp. 526–536, 2019.

H. T. Arkenau, J. Martin-Liberal, E. Calvo et al., “Ramucirumab plus pembrolizumab in patients with previously treated advanced or metastatic biliary tract cancer: nonrandomized, open-label, phase I trial (JVDF),” The Oncologist, vol. 23, no. 12, article e136, p. 1407, 2018.

Z. Dong, B. Liao, W. Shen, C. Sui, and J. Yang, “Expression of programmed death ligand 1 is associated with the prognosis of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma,” Digestive Diseases and Sciences, vol. 65, no. 2, pp. 480–488, 2020.

F. Gani, N. Nagarajan, Y. Kim et al., “Program death 1 immune checkpoint and tumor microenvironment: implications for patients with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma,” Annals of Surgical Oncology, vol. 23, no. 8, pp. 2610–2617, 2016.

M. Gou, Y. Zhang, H. Si, and G. Dai, “Efficacy and safety of nivolumab for metastatic biliary tract cancer,” OncoTargets and Therapy, vol. Volume 12, pp. 861–867, 2019.

C. Y. Jing, Y. P. Fu, Y. Yi et al., “HHLA2 in intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: an immune checkpoint with prognostic significance and wider expression compared with PD-L1,” Journal for Immunotherapy of Cancer, vol. 7, no. 1, p. 77, 2019.

R. Kim, D. Coppola, E. Wang et al., “Prognostic value of CD8CD45RO tumor infiltrating lymphocytes in patients with extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma,” Oncotarget, vol. 9, no. 34, pp. 23366–23372, 2018.

Y. Kitano, Y. I. Yamashita, Y. Nakao et al., “Clinical significance of PD-L1 expression in both cancer and stroma cells of cholangiocarcinoma patients,” Annals of Surgical Oncology, vol. 27, no. 2, pp. 599–607, 2020.

M. Kriegsmann, S. Roessler, K. Kriegsmann et al., “Programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1, CD274) in cholangiocarcinoma - correlation with clinicopathological data and comparison of antibodies,” BMC Cancer, vol. 19, no. 1, p. 72, 2019.

Y. J. Lim, J. Koh, K. Kim et al., “High ratio of programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1)⁺/CD8⁺ tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes identifies a poor prognostic subset of extrahepatic bile duct cancer undergoing surgery plus adjuvant chemoradiotherapy,” Radiotherapy and Oncology, vol. 117, no. 1, pp. 165–170, 2015.

J. C. Lu, H. Y. Zeng, Q. M. Sun et al., “Distinct PD-L1/PD1 profiles and clinical implications in intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma patients with different risk factors,” Theranostics, vol. 9, no. 16, pp. 4678–4687, 2019.

K. Ma, X. Wei, D. Dong, Y. Wu, Q. Geng, and E. Li, “PD-L1 and PD-1 expression correlate with prognosis in extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma,” Oncology Letters, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 250–256, 2017.

S. Sangkhamanon, P. Jongpairat, A. Sookprasert et al., “Programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression associated with a high neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio in cholangiocarcinoma,” Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention, vol. 18, no. 6, pp. 1671–1674, 2017.

K. Tamai, M. Nakamura, M. Mizuma et al., “Suppressive expression of CD274 increases tumorigenesis and cancer stem cell phenotypes in cholangiocarcinoma,” Cancer Science, vol. 105, no. 6, pp. 667–674, 2014.

T. Ueno, T. Tsuchikawa, K. C. Hatanaka et al., “Prognostic impact of programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression and its association with epithelial-mesenchymal transition in extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma,” Oncotarget, vol. 9, no. 28, pp. 20034–20047, 2018.

D. Walter, E. Herrmann, A. A. Schnitzbauer et al., “PD-L1 expression in extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma,” Histopathology, vol. 71, no. 3, pp. 383–392, 2017.

F. Yu, L. Gong, Z. Mo et al., “Programmed death ligand-1, tumor infiltrating lymphocytes and HLA expression in Chinese extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma patients: possible immunotherapy implications,” Bioscience Trends, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 58–69, 2019.

Y. Zhu, X. Y. Wang, Y. Zhang et al., “Programmed death ligand 1 expression in human intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma and its association with prognosis and CD8⁺ T-cell immune responses,” Cancer Management and Research, vol. Volume 10, pp. 4113–4123, 2018.

D. Moher, A. Liberati, J. Tetzlaff, D. G. Altman, and PRISMA Group, “Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement,” Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, vol. 62, no. 10, pp. 1006–1012, 2009.

J. F. Tierney, L. A. Stewart, D. Ghersi, S. Burdett, and M. R. Sydes, “Practical methods for incorporating summary time-to-event data into meta-analysis,” Trials, vol. 8, no. 1, 2007.

G. A. Wells, B. Shea, D. O'Connell et al., “The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for assessing the quality of nonrandomised studies in meta-analyses,” 2009, http://www.ohri.ca/programs/clinical_epidemiology/oxford.asp.

W. R. Jarnagin, Y. Fong, R. P. DeMatteo et al., “Staging, resectability, and outcome in 225 patients with hilar cholangiocarcinoma,” Annals of Surgery, vol. 234, no. 4, pp. 507–519, 2001.

S. Rizvi, S. A. Khan, C. L. Hallemeier, R. K. Kelley, and G. J. Gores, “Cholangiocarcinoma -- evolving concepts and therapeutic strategies,” Nature Reviews Clinical Oncology, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 95–111, 2018.

L. Fabris, M. J. Perugorria, J. Mertens et al., “The tumour microenvironment and immune milieu of cholangiocarcinoma,” Liver International, vol. 39, no. S1, pp. 63–78, 2019.

D. L. Barber, E. J. Wherry, D. Masopust et al., “Restoring function in exhausted CD8 T cells during chronic viral infection,” Nature, vol. 439, no. 7077, pp. 682–687, 2006.

H. Dong, S. E. Strome, D. R. Salomao et al., “Tumor-associated B7-H1 promotes T-cell apoptosis: a potential mechanism of immune evasion,” Nature Medicine, vol. 8, no. 8, pp. 793–800, 2002.

A. Constantinidou, C. Alifieris, and D. T. Trafalis, “Targeting Programmed Cell Death -1 (PD-1) and Ligand (PD-L1): A new era in cancer active immunotherapy,” Pharmacology & Therapeutics, vol. 194, pp. 84–106, 2019.

J. Fontugne, J. Augustin, A. Pujals et al., “PD-L1 expression in perihilar and intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma,” Oncotarget, vol. 8, no. 15, pp. 24644–24651, 2017.

Y. Kim, X. Wen, N. Y. Cho, and G. H. Kang, “Intratumoral immune cells expressing PD-1/PD-L1 and their prognostic implications in cancer: a meta-analysis,” International Journal of Biological Markers, vol. 33, no. 4, pp. 467–474, 2018.

Q. Wang, F. Liu, and L. Liu, “Prognostic significance of PD-L1 in solid tumor an updated meta-analysis,” Medicine, vol. 96, no. 18, p. e6369, 2017.

Z. Shen, L. Gu, D. Mao, M. Chen, and R. Jin, “Clinicopathological and prognostic significance of PD-L1 expression in colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis,” World Journal of Surgical Oncology, vol. 17, no. 1, p. 4, 2019.

L. Qiu, H. Zheng, and X. Zhao, “The prognostic and clinicopathological significance of PD-L1 expression in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: a meta-analysis,” BMC Cancer, vol. 19, no. 1, p. 273, 2019.