SynthesisJournal of cancer research and clinical oncology2023
Immune checkpoint inhibitors' combination therapy as first-line treatment in advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone for locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a real-world retrospective study.Discover oncology · 2025Article
- Comprehensive analysis of clinical features, mRNA splicing, and immunological role of REEP5 in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Treatment-related adverse events of combination chemoimmunotherapy versus chemotherapy alone in first-line treatment for non-small cell lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.Journal of thoracic disease · 2024Article
- Immunological biomarkers and predictive model for recurrence of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma after combined immunotherapy and neoadjuvant chemotherapy.American journal of cancer research · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe benefit of immune checkpoint inhibitors' (ICIs) combination therapy in patients with advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) remained unclear. We performed a meta-analysis to explore the efficacy and safety of ICIs' combination therapy versus chemotherapy alone as first-line treatment in advanced ESCC.
methodsA systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of ICIs' combination therapy as first-line treatment in advanced ESCC was conducted via searching PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane database. The data for efficacy and safety of ICIs' combination therapy were subject to meta-analysis. Subgroup analysis was performed in patients with different PD-L1 expression status.
resultsA total of 5 RCTs and 3163 patients were included. Overall, the hazard ratio (HR) for overall survival (OS) benefit with ICIs' combination therapy was 0.68 (95% CI 0.62-0.75) compared with chemotherapy alone. The HR for progression-free survival (PFS) benefit and the odds ratio (OR) for overall response rate (ORR) increase were 0.62 (95% CI 0.56-0.68) and 2.01 (95% CI 1.70-2.38), respectively. The OS and PFS benefits with ICIs' combination therapy over chemotherapy alone were also observed in the subgroup of PD-L1 positive expression, but not in the subgroup of PD-L1 negative expression. The incidence of grade 3 or higher treatment-related adverse events was 60.4% with ICIs' combination therapy and 56.3% with chemotherapy alone (OR, 1.19; 95% CI 0.90-1.57).
conclusionICIs' combination therapy showed superior OS, PFS, and ORR over chemotherapy alone with a manageable safety profile. These results suggested that ICIs' combination therapy can be considered as a new first-line treatment for advanced ESCC.
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.