Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35494078›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in oncology2022

How Immunotherapy Modified the Therapeutic Scenario of Endometrial Cancer: A Systematic Review.

Brigida Anna Maiorano, Mauro Francesco Pio Maiorano, Gennaro Cormio, Annamaria Maglione, Domenica Lorusso, Evaristo Maiello

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
4.4field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Observational
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
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

6 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Brigida Anna MaioranoOncology Department, Fondazione Casa Sollievo della Sofferenza IRCCS, San Giovanni Rotondo, Italy.
Mauro Francesco Pio MaioranoObstetrics and Gynecology Unit, Department of Biomedical Sciences and Human Oncology, University of Bari "Aldo Moro", Bari, Italy.
Gennaro CormioObstetrics and Gynecology Unit, Department of Biomedical Sciences and Human Oncology, University of Bari "Aldo Moro", Bari, Italy.
Annamaria MaglioneObstetrics and Gynecology Department, Fondazione Casa Sollievo della Sofferenza IRCCS, San Giovanni Rotondo, Italy.
Domenica LorussoDepartment of Women and Child Health, Division of Gynaecologic Oncology, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario "A. Gemelli" IRCCS, Rome, Italy.
Evaristo MaielloOncology Department, Fondazione Casa Sollievo della Sofferenza IRCCS, San Giovanni Rotondo, Italy.
University of Bari Aldo Moro · ITAgostino Gemelli University Polyclinic · ITCasa Sollievo della Sofferenza · ITIstituti di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico · ITUniversità Cattolica del Sacro Cuore · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Endometrial cancer (EC) represents the sixth most common female tumor. In the advanced setting, the prognosis is dismal with limited treatment options. Platinum-based chemotherapy represents the actual standard of care in first-line chemotherapy, but no standard second-line chemotherapy is approved, with less than 1/4 of patients responding to second-line chemotherapy. In the last 10 years, immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have changed the treatment landscape of many solid tumors. Methods: The review was conducted according to the PRISMA guidelines. We searched EMBASE, MEDLINE, Cochrane Database, and conference abstracts from international societies, up to November 2021. Clinical trials employing ICIs in advanced EC, written in English, were included. Reviews, letters, and commentaries were excluded. The overall response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety (number and grade of treatment-related adverse events [TRAEs]) were evaluated. Results: 15 studies, for a total of 1,627 patients, were included: 14 non-randomized phase I/II trials and 1 randomized phase III trial. Anti-PD1 (pembrolizumab, nivolumab, dostarlimab) and anti-PD-L1 agents (avelumab, atezolizumab, durvalumab) were administered as single agents; pembrolizumab and nivolumab were combined with the tyrosine-kinase inhibitors (TKI) lenvatinib and cabozantinib, respectively; and durvalumab was associated with anti-CTLA4 tremelimumab. 4 studies selected only MSI patients. Single agents determined an ORR from 26.7% to 58% among MSI patients, from 3% to 26.7% among MSS patients. DCR ranged from 53.5% to 88.9% in MSI, 31.4% to 35.2% in MSS patients. The combination of TKI and ICIs determined 32% to 63.6% of ORR in all-comers, 32%-36.2% in MSS patients. 54.2% to 76% of patients developed TRAEs. The combination of ICIs and TKI achieved a higher toxicity rate than single agents (≥G3 TRAEs 88.9%). Conclusion: ICIs represent an effective option for pretreated advanced EC patients with a tolerable profile. Given the encouraging results in MSI patients, every woman diagnosed with EC should be investigated for MS status. In MSS women, the combination of ICIs and TKI is more effective than monotherapy, notwithstanding safety concerns. PD-L1 cannot predict ICI response, whereas other biomarkers such as MSI and tumor mutational burden seem more accurate. Ongoing randomized trials will further clarify the role of these therapeutic options. Systematic Review Registration: PROSPERO, CRD42021293538.

Indexed as

dostarlimabendometrial cancer (EC)immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI)immunotherapylenvatinibmicrosatellite instability (MSI)PD1pembrolizumab

Identifiers

PMID35494078
PMCPMC9047829
OpenAlexW4223986305

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.