Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37152364›Full record

ArticleEClinicalMedicine2023

Anti-PD-1 therapy plus chemotherapy versus anti-PD-1 therapy alone in patients with high-risk chemorefractory or relapsed gestational trophoblastic neoplasia: a multicenter, retrospective study.

Xiaoyu Wang, Wei Cang, Xiaomei Liu, Yu Cheng, Xirun Wan, Fengzhi Feng, Tong Ren, Jun Zhao, Fang Jiang, Hongyan Cheng and 7 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in EClinicalMedicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
6.7field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Immune checkpoint inhibitors in gynecologic oncology: Current status and perspectives.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2025
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. 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

17 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Xiaoyu WangDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Science, Peking Union Medical College, National Clinical Research Center for Obstetric and Gynecologic Diseases, Beijing, China.
Wei CangDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Science, Peking Union Medical College, National Clinical Research Center for Obstetric and Gynecologic Diseases, Beijing, China.
Xiaomei LiuDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, China.
Yu ChengDepartment of Gynecology, Obstetrics and Gynecology Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.
Xirun WanDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Science, Peking Union Medical College, National Clinical Research Center for Obstetric and Gynecologic Diseases, Beijing, China.
Fengzhi FengDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Science, Peking Union Medical College, National Clinical Research Center for Obstetric and Gynecologic Diseases, Beijing, China.
Tong RenDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Science, Peking Union Medical College, National Clinical Research Center for Obstetric and Gynecologic Diseases, Beijing, China.
Jun ZhaoDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Science, Peking Union Medical College, National Clinical Research Center for Obstetric and Gynecologic Diseases, Beijing, China.
Fang JiangDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Science, Peking Union Medical College, National Clinical Research Center for Obstetric and Gynecologic Diseases, Beijing, China.
Hongyan ChengDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Science, Peking Union Medical College, National Clinical Research Center for Obstetric and Gynecologic Diseases, Beijing, China.
Yu GuDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Science, Peking Union Medical College, National Clinical Research Center for Obstetric and Gynecologic Diseases, Beijing, China.
Lihua ChenDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Science, Peking Union Medical College, National Clinical Research Center for Obstetric and Gynecologic Diseases, Beijing, China.
Chen LiDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Science, Peking Union Medical College, National Clinical Research Center for Obstetric and Gynecologic Diseases, Beijing, China.
Xiuqin LiDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, China.
Junjun YangDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Science, Peking Union Medical College, National Clinical Research Center for Obstetric and Gynecologic Diseases, Beijing, China.
Xin LuDepartment of Gynecology, Obstetrics and Gynecology Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.
Yang XiangDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Science, Peking Union Medical College, National Clinical Research Center for Obstetric and Gynecologic Diseases, Beijing, China.
Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College · CNChina Medical University · CNObstetrics and Gynecology Hospital of Fudan University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Synergistic antitumor effects of immunotherapy and chemotherapy have been demonstrated in several solid tumors. However, this combination strategy has not been addressed in gestational trophoblastic neoplasia (GTN) cases. We therefore compared the safety and therapeutic effect of anti-programmed cell death 1 (PD-1) therapy combined with chemotherapy versus anti-PD-1 monotherapy among high-risk chemorefractory or relapsed GTN patients. Methods: This retrospective cohort study was conducted at three teaching hospitals in China. Chemorefractory or relapsed GTN cases receiving anti-PD-1 therapy combined with chemotherapy or anti-PD-1 monotherapy were selected from each center between August 2018 and March 2022. Study endpoints included objective response rate (ORR), treatment duration, overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). The nature, prevalence and severity of treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were evaluated. Findings: This work enrolled 66 cases. Thirty-five and 31 patients received anti-PD-1 therapy alone and combined with chemotherapy, respectively. The combined treatment dramatically increased the objective response rate from 62.9% (22/35) to 96.8% (30/31) (p < 0.001). The median durations until complete response were 2.2 (interquartile range [IQR], 1.4-4.2) and 2.8 (IQR, 1.8-2.8) months in the anti-PD-1 monotherapy and combined treatment cohorts, respectively (P = 0.299). The complete response rate (CRR) for anti-PD-1-refractory patients to salvage chemotherapy was 84.6% (11/13). No significant difference in OS [HR 0.50 (95% CI 0.07-3.24), p = 0.499] was detected between anti-PD-1 cohort and anti-PD-1 plus chemotherapy cohort. The PFS in combined group was significantly longer than in anti-PD-1 group [HR 0.06 (95% CI 0.02-0.16), p < 0.001]. TRAEs were observed in 27 (77.1%) and 25 (80.6%) patients receiving anti-PD-1 therapy monotherapy and combined therapy, respectively (p = 0.729). Interpretation: Anti-PD-1 therapy combined with chemotherapy exhibits sustainably improved antitumor effect and tolerable toxic effects among high-risk chemorefractory or relapsed GTN cases. Patients not responding to PD-1 inhibitors can be effectively rescued with salvage chemotherapy. Funding: The study was supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China (81971475 and 81972451), and the National High Level Hospital Clinical Research Funding (2022-PUMCH-B-083 and 2022-PUMCH-B-084).

Indexed as

ChemotherapyCombination therapyGestational trophoblastic neoplasiaPD-1 inhibitors

Identifiers

PMID37152364
PMCPMC10154962
OpenAlexW4367294578

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.