SynthesisJournal of cancer research and clinical oncology2024
Approved immune checkpoint inhibitors in hepatocellular carcinoma: a large-scale meta-analysis and systematic review.
Synthesis in Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Immunotherapy in hepatocellular carcinoma: translating mechanistic insights into clinical advances.Clinical and experimental medicine · 2026Review
- Beta-glucans in oncology: revolutionizing treatment with immune power & tumor targeting.Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology · 2026Review
- Role of immune checkpoint inhibitor combinations in resectable and unresectable, embolization-eligible hepatocellular carcinoma.Therapeutic advances in medical oncology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
A meta-analysis was performed to assess the benefits and safety profile of approved immune checkpoint inhibitors in hepatocellular carcinoma patients. Eligible studies were searched from Cochrane, Embase, and PubMed databases based on a well-established strategy. Following the exclusion of ineligible studies, 12 studies were included in this meta-analysis. Compared with control group, immune checkpoint inhibitors were associated with improved ORR (OR 3.03, 95% CI 2.26-4.05, P < 0.00001), SD (OR 0.77, 95% CI 0.62-0.95, P = 0.02), OS (HR 0.75, 95% CI 0.68-0.83, P < 0.00001), and PFS (HR 0.74, 95% CI 0.63-0.87, P < 0.0003). However, no significant differences were observed in DCR (OR 1.33, 95% CI 0.97-1.81, P = 0.07), PD (OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.67-1.21, P = 0.48), and all caused any-grade adverse events (OR 1.22, 95% CI 0.62-2.39, P = 0. 57), all caused ≥ grade 3 adverse events (OR 1.10, 95% CI 0.97-1.25, P = 0.14), treatment-related any-grade adverse events (OR 1.13, 95% CI 0.55-2.32, P = 0.73), and treatment-related ≥ grade 3 events (OR 0.82, 95% CI 0.34-1.97, P = 0.65) between the two groups. After subgroup analysis conducted, patients in the immune checkpoint inhibitor group compared with targeted drug group showed significant improvements in OS (HR 0.74, 95% CI 0.66-0.84, P < 0.00001) and PFS (HR 0.75, 95% CI 0.61-0.91, P = 0.004). Immune checkpoint inhibitors have demonstrated peculiar benefits in the treatment of HCC with an acceptable safety profile. Compared to targeted drugs, immune checkpoint inhibitors still offer advantages in the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma. However, there is still considerable room for further improvement.
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.