Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37338126›Full record

ReviewThe oncologist2023

Neoadjuvant Versus Adjuvant Systemic Therapy for Early-Stage Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: The Changing Landscape Due to Immunotherapy.

Ajoy Oommen John, Nithya Ramnath

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in The oncologist, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

24 citing papers in PubMed.

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

2 authors.

Ajoy Oommen JohnDepartment of Medical Oncology, Christian Medical College, Vellore, India.
Nithya RamnathDivision of Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) remains a major cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. One-third of NSCLC patients present with surgically resectable, non-metastatic disease; however, many of these patients will recur despite curative surgery and adjuvant therapy. The recent publication of randomized trials incorporating immune check-point inhibitors (ICI) to the standard neo-adjuvant and adjuvant treatment regimens has reported improved survival with manageable toxicity profiles. The IMpower 010 studied the use of adjuvant atezolizumab after standard surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy. They demonstrated an improvement in 3-year disease-free survival (DFS) prompting a change in treatment guidelines. The Checkmate 816 and NADIM II studies evaluated the addition of pembrolizumab and nivolumab, respectively, to standard neo-adjuvant chemotherapy. The results from both trials showed an improvement in 2-year event-free survival (EFS) and 2-year PFS (PFS), respectively. In this review, we summarize the prior data regarding adjuvant and neo-adjuvant chemotherapy in NSCLC and elaborate on results from the newer trials incorporating ICIs. We briefly discuss the pros and cons of each treatment approach along with areas that need further clarity to inform clinical practice and future directions for research in this disease.

Indexed as

Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell LungLung NeoplasmsSmall Cell Lung CarcinomaAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsHumansImmunotherapyNeoadjuvant TherapyNeoplasm Recurrence, Localadjuvantimmunotherapylung cancerneoadjuvant

Identifiers

PMID37338126
PMCPMC10485299

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.