SynthesisThoracic cancer2019
Efficacy of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer: A meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.
Synthesis in Thoracic cancer, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Response Rate and Survival at Key Timepoints With PD-1 Blockade vs Chemotherapy in PD-L1 Subgroups: Meta-Analysis of Metastatic NSCLC Trials.JNCI cancer spectrum · 2021Pooled it
- Immune checkpoint inhibitor-induced cardiotoxicity: from immune mechanisms to clinical surveillance and targeted therapies.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Review
- Induction chemoimmunotherapy may achieve non-inferior outcomes to consolidation immunotherapy in patients with unresectable stage III NSCLC: a real-world multicenter retrospective study.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Article
- The efficacy and safety of tislelizumab in the treatment of locally advanced or metastatic lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Review
- Programmed death 1 (PD-1) and ligand (PD-L1) inhibitors in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma: A meta-analysis.World journal of otorhinolaryngology - head and neck surgery · 2022Review
- Article
- Oncologic Emergencies: Immune-Based Cancer Therapies and Complications.The western journal of emergency medicine · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis meta-analysis systematically evaluated the efficacy of PD-1 and PD-L1 inhibitors for the treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and investigated the efficacy of first-line therapy and PD-1 versus PD-L1 inhibitors.
methodsPubMed, The Cochrane Library, and Embase were searched up to November 2018 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for eligible studies. The outcome of interest was overall survival (OS). The methodology was based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses and Cochrane Collaboration guidelines. Data were pooled by using the random effects model and expressed as hazard ratios (HRs) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Heterogeneity was assessed and quantified (I
resultsSeven RCTs were included in this study. PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors achieved superior OS compared to chemotherapy (HR 0.72, 95% CI 0.63-0.82; P < 0.0001). OS was superior in previously treated patients compared to untreated patients (HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.63-0.76; HR 0.82, 95% CI 0.47-1.44, respectively). No significant differences in OS were observed between PD-1 and PD-L1 inhibitors (HR 0.71, 95% CI 0.59-0.86; HR 0.73, 95% CI 0.63-0.84, respectively).
conclusionsPD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors significantly prolonged the OS of previously treated patients. No significant differences in OS were observed between PD-1 and PD-L1 inhibitors.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.