SynthesisCancer medicine2019
Effect of sex on the efficacy of patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors in advanced non-small cell lung cancer.
Synthesis in Cancer medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers, 5 of them syntheses 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
39 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Association between sex and outcomes in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer receiving combination chemoimmunotherapy as a first-line therapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.European journal of medical research · 2022Pooled it
- Efficacy of Atezolizumab for Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Based on Clinical and Molecular Features: A Meta-Analysis.Frontiers in immunology · 2022Pooled it
- Inhibitors of PD-1 in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Meta-Analysis of Clinical and Molecular Features.Frontiers in immunology · 2022Pooled it
- Association Between Efficacy of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors and Sex: An Updated Meta-Analysis on 21 Trials and 12,675 Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Patients.Frontiers in oncology · 2021Pooled it
- Effect of sex on the efficacy of patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors in advanced non-small cell lung cancer.Cancer medicine · 2019Pooled it
- Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab and chemotherapy in metastatic nonsquamous NSCLC: the randomized double-blind phase 3 IMpower151 trial.Nature medicine · 2025Trial
- Review
- Review
- Sex-related differences in the efficacy and toxicity of cancer treatments.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2025Review
- Sex and Gender in Myeloid and Lymphoblastic Leukemias and Multiple Myeloma: From Molecular Mechanisms to Clinical Outcomes.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2025Review
- Effect of Gender on Patients with Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer Treated with Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors: A Real-World Study.Biomedicines · 2025Article
- Pembrolizumab in PD-L1-positive advanced non-small cell lung carcinoma: A meta-analysis of survival benefits and immune-related toxicity events patterns.ADMET & DMPK · 2025Article
- Review
- Lung cancer in females-sex-based differences from males in epidemiology, biology, and outcomes: a narrative review.Translational lung cancer research · 2024Review
- Antibiotic treatment and survival in non-small cell lung cancer patients receiving immunotherapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Translational lung cancer research · 2023Article
- Sex and anti-inflammatory treatment affect outcome of melanoma and non-small cell lung cancer patients with rheumatic immune-related adverse events.Journal for immunotherapy of cancer · 2023Observational
- Association between white blood cell count to hemoglobin ratio and risk of in-hospital mortality in patients with lung cancer.BMC pulmonary medicine · 2023Article
- Risk of diabetes mellitus among users of immune checkpoint inhibitors: A population-based cohort study.Cancer medicine · 2023Article
- Effectiveness of immunological agents in non-small cell lung cancer.Cancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2023Review
- Comparing the Therapeutic Efficacies of Lung Cancer: Network Meta-Analysis Approaches.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have shown promising efficacy in the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Sex-associated dimorphism in immune system response is acknowledged, but the effect of patients' sex on efficacy of ICIs as treatment in NSCLC still remains controversial. The present study was conducted to investigate the difference in efficacy of NSCLC patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors according to the sex. A total of 9583 patients involved 6567 men and 3016 women with advanced lung cancer from 15 randomized controlled trials were included in this study. An overall survival (OS) benefit of immune checkpoint inhibitors was illustrated in both male (HR 0.76, 95% CI 0.71-0.82) and female (HR 0.73, 95% CI 0.58-0.91) patients, and a progression-free survival (PFS) benefit was also found in both men (HR 0.67, 95% CI 0.58-0.77) and women (HR 0.73, 95% CI 0.56-0.95) in NSCLC. Both PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors alone and PD-1/PD-L1 plus chemotherapy significantly improved the OS and PFS in male patients. Whereas in females, PD-1 inhibitors or monotherapy significantly benefited the OS but not the PFS, PD-L1 inhibitors or combination therapy significantly prolonged the PFS but not the OS. No survival benefit was found in both male and female patients from the CTLA-4 inhibitors. The current study indicated that the magnitude of survival benefit is sex-dependent and male patients seemed to obtain more consistent and favorable outcomes from ICIs than women patients in NSCLC.
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.