Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32766800›Full record

SynthesisJAMA network open2020

Association of Sex, Age, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status With Survival Benefit of Cancer Immunotherapy in Randomized Clinical Trials: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Fang Yang, Svetomir N Markovic, Julian R Molina, Thorvardur R Halfdanarson, Lance C Pagliaro, Ashish V Chintakuntlawar, Rutian Li, Jia Wei, Lifeng Wang, Baorui Liu and 3 more

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in JAMA network open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 74 papers, 10 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
74citing papers in PubMed, 10 pooled it
6.4field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

74 citing papers in PubMed, 10 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 117 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Observational
  18. Article
  19. Observational
  20. Article

14 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Fang YangThe Comprehensive Cancer Center of Drum Tower Hospital, Clinical Cancer Institute of Nanjing University, Nanjing, China.
Svetomir N MarkovicDivision of Medical Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
Julian R MolinaDivision of Medical Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
Thorvardur R HalfdanarsonDivision of Medical Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
Lance C PagliaroDivision of Medical Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
Ashish V ChintakuntlawarDivision of Medical Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
Rutian LiThe Comprehensive Cancer Center of Drum Tower Hospital, Clinical Cancer Institute of Nanjing University, Nanjing, China.
Jia WeiThe Comprehensive Cancer Center of Drum Tower Hospital, Clinical Cancer Institute of Nanjing University, Nanjing, China.
Lifeng WangThe Comprehensive Cancer Center of Drum Tower Hospital, Clinical Cancer Institute of Nanjing University, Nanjing, China.
Baorui LiuThe Comprehensive Cancer Center of Drum Tower Hospital, Clinical Cancer Institute of Nanjing University, Nanjing, China.
Grzegorz S NowakowskiDivision of Hematology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
Michael L WangDepartment of Lymphoma/Myeloma, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston.
Yucai WangDivision of Hematology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
Mayo Clinic · USNanjing Drum Tower Hospital · CNThe University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center · USWinnMed · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Sex, age, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (PS) may affect immune response. However, the association of these factors with the survival benefit of cancer immunotherapy with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) remains unclear. Objective: To assess the potential sex, age, and ECOG PS differences of immunotherapy survival benefit in patients with advanced cancer. Data Sources: PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Scopus were searched from inception to August 31, 2019. Study Selection: Published randomized clinical trials comparing overall survival (OS) in patients with advanced cancer treated with ICI immunotherapy vs non-ICI control therapy were included. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Pooled OS hazard ratio (HR) and 95% CI for patients of different sex, age (<65 and ≥65 years) or ECOG PS (0 and ≥1) were calculated separately using a random-effects model, and the heterogeneity between paired estimates was assessed using an interaction test by pooling study-specific interaction HRs. This study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guideline. Main Outcomes and Measures: The difference in survival benefit of ICIs between sex, age (<65 vs ≥65 years), and ECOG PS (0 vs ≥1), as well as the difference stratified by cancer type, line of therapy, agent of immunotherapy, and immunotherapy strategy in the intervention arm. Results: Thirty-seven phase 2 or 3 randomized clinical trials involving 23 760 patients were included. An OS benefit of immunotherapy was found for both men (HR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.71-0.81) and women (HR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.72-0.88); for both younger (<65 years: HR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.71-0.83) and older (≥65 years: HR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.72-0.84) patients; and for both patients with ECOG PS 0 (HR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.73-0.90) and PS greater than or equal to 1 (HR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.74-0.84). No significant difference of relative benefit from immunotherapy over control therapy was found in patients of different sex (P = .25, I2 = 19.02%), age (P = .94, I2 = 15.57%), or ECOG PS (P = .74, I2 = 0%). No significant difference was found in subgroup analyses by cancer type, line of therapy, agent of immunotherapy, and immunotherapy strategy in the intervention arm. Conclusions and Relevance: This meta-analysis found no evidence of an association of sex, age (<65 vs ≥65 years), or ECOG PS (0 vs ≥1) with cancer immunotherapy survival benefit. This finding suggests that the use of ICIs in advanced cancer should not be restricted to certain patients in sex, age, or ECOG PS categories.

Indexed as

AgedAge FactorsFemaleHumansImmunotherapyMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasmsRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSex FactorsTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID32766800
PMCPMC7414387
OpenAlexW3047718208

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.