ReviewFrontiers in oncology2021
A Network Meta-Analysis of Cancer Immunotherapies
Review in Frontiers in oncology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 4 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 24 citations in OpenAlex.
- Chemotherapy backbone and outcomes of immune checkpoint inhibitor combinations across solid tumors: a pan-tumor network meta-analysis.The oncologist · 2026Pooled it
- First-line immunotherapy efficacy in advanced squamous non-small cell lung cancer with PD-L1 expression ≥50%: a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Pooled it
- Pooled it
- A systematic review and network meta-analysis of first-line immune checkpoint inhibitor combination therapies in patients with advanced non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer.Frontiers in immunology · 2022Pooled it
- [Addiction problems in outpatient palliative care in Germany : A survey among palliative care teams].Schmerz (Berlin, Germany) · 2026Article
- Real-World Survival Outcomes of Patients With High PD-L1 Advanced NSCLC Who Received Chemoimmunotherapy Versus Immunotherapy.Asia-Pacific journal of clinical oncology · 2026Article
- Assessing the prognosis of metastatic or recurrent non-small cell lung cancer in the era of modern systemic therapies: a multivariable analysis of 343 patients treated in Poland.Translational lung cancer research · 2025Article
- Medication misuse and illicit substance use among palliative care patients in German palliative care units- an evaluation from the perspective of palliative care providers.Addiction science & clinical practice · 2025Article
- Cost-effectiveness of first-line immunotherapy combinations with or without chemotherapy for advanced non-small cell lung cancer: a modelling approach.BMC cancer · 2024Article
- Integrating multi-omics and machine learning survival frameworks to build a prognostic model based on immune function and cell death patterns in a lung adenocarcinoma cohort.Frontiers in immunology · 2024Article
- Article
- Liquid Biopsy in NSCLC: An Investigation with Multiple Clinical Implications.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
- Cost-effectiveness of atezolizumab versus pembrolizumab as first-line treatment in PD-L1-positive advanced non-small-cell lung cancer in Spain.Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E · 2023Article
- Article
- A Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis of First-Line Treatments for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer with High Programmed Death Ligand-1 Expression.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Review
- Emerging PD-1/PD-L1 targeting immunotherapy in non-small cell lung cancer: Current status and future perspective in Japan, US, EU, and China.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Review
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 at 6 institutions in 5 countries.
Funding
Abstract
In the absence of head-to-head trials of first-line treatments for metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), synthesis of available evidence is needed. We conducted a systematic literature review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials in patients with stage IV NSCLC and high programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression. Patients with other-stage NSCLC or without PD-L1 expression and populations with < 80% stage IV NSCLC were excluded. Outcomes included overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), and treatment-related adverse events. English records from MEDLINE and Embase published through October 2020 were eligible, supplemented by hand searches of other sources. Three evidence networks were constructed based on histology (mixed, squamous, non-squamous). OS and PFS results were analyzed applying Bayesian fractional polynomial random-effects models. Hazard ratios over time with 95% credible intervals (CrIs) and expected differences in OS and PFS between each cancer immunotherapy regimen and the chemotherapy common comparator were generated. Seventeen clinical trials were included after screening 32,527 records. Heterogeneity and risk of bias were generally low across trials. In the mixed-histology network of PD-L1-high patients, expected OS was significantly longer with atezolizumab (estimated difference: 10.4 months [95% CrI: 1.9, 18.2]), pembrolizumab (7.2 [2.2, 12.3]), and cemiplimab (13.0 [4.2, 21.0])
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.