Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38470132›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2024

Therapeutic vaccines for advanced non-small cell lung cancer.

Marcela Cortés-Jofré, Mikel Rueda-Etxebarria, Emeline Orillard, Elena Jimenez Tejero, José-Ramón Rueda

Open access · greenAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Therapeutic vaccines for advanced non-small cell lung cancer.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024
    Pooled it
  2. Therapeutic vaccines for NSCLC: From mechanisms to clinical translation.Chinese medical journal pulmonary and critical care medicine · 2026
    Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. The progress of tumor vaccines clinical trials in non-small cell lung cancer.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2025
    Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Therapeutic Vaccines for Follicular Lymphoma: A Systematic Review.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Review
  13. 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

5 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Marcela Cortés-JofréFaculty of Medicine, Universidad Católica de la Santísima Concepción, Concepción, Chile.
Mikel Rueda-EtxebarriaResearch in Sciences of dissemination and implementation in health services, Biobizkaia Health Research Institute, Barakaldo, Spain.
Emeline OrillardDepartment of Medical Oncology, Besançon, France.
Elena Jimenez TejeroIndependent Cochrane review author, Madrid, Spain.
José-Ramón RuedaDepartment of Preventive Medicine and Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Nursing. University of the Basque Country, Leioa, Spain.
BioCruces Health research Institute · ESUniversidad Católica de la Santísima Concepción · CLUniversidad Francisco de Vitoria · ESUniversity of the Basque Country · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNew strategies in immunotherapy with specific antigens that trigger an anti-tumour immune response in people with lung cancer open the possibility of developing therapeutic vaccines aimed at boosting the adaptive immune response against cancer cells.

objectivesTo evaluate the effectiveness and safety of different types of therapeutic vaccines for people with advanced non-small cell lung cancer. SEARCH

methodsWe searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Wanfang Data, and China Journal Net (CNKI) up to 22 August 2023. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included parallel-group, randomised controlled trials evaluating a therapeutic cancer vaccine, alone or in combination with other treatments, in adults (> 18 years) with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), whatever the line of treatment. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Our primary outcomes were overall survival, progression-free survival, and serious adverse events; secondary outcomes were three- and five-year survival rates and health-related quality of life. MAIN

resultsWe included 10 studies with 2177 participants. The outcome analyses included only 2045 participants (1401 men and 644 women). The certainty of the evidence varied by vaccine and outcome, and ranged from moderate to very low. We report only the results for primary outcomes here. TG4010 The addition of the vector-based vaccine, TG4010, to chemotherapy, compared with chemotherapy alone in first-line treatment, may result in little to no difference in overall survival (hazard ratio (HR) 0.83, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.65 to 1.05; 2 studies, 370 participants; low-certainty evidence). It may increase progression-free survival slightly (HR 0.74, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.99; 1 study, 222 participants; low-certainty evidence). It may result in little to no difference in the proportion of participants with at least one serious treatment-related adverse event, but the evidence is very uncertain (risk ratio (RR) 0.70, 95% CI 0.23 to 2.19; 2 studies, 362 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Epidermal growth factor vaccine Epidermal growth factor vaccine, compared to best supportive care as switch maintenance treatment after first-line chemotherapy, may result in little to no difference in overall survival (HR 0.82, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.02; 1 study, 378 participants; low-certainty evidence), and in the proportion of participants with at least one serious treatment-related adverse event (RR 1.32, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.98; 2 studies, 458 participants; low-certainty evidence). hTERT (vx-001) The hTERT (vx-001) vaccine compared to placebo as maintenance treatment after first-line chemotherapy may result in little to no difference in overall survival (HR 0.97, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.34; 1 study, 190 participants). Racotumomab Racotumomab compared to placebo as a switch maintenance treatment post-chemotherapy was assessed in one study with 176 participants. It may increase overall survival (HR 0.63, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.87). It may make little to no difference in progression-free survival (HR 0.73, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.00) and in the proportion of people with at least one serious treatment-related adverse event (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.15 to 7.18). Racotumomab versus docetaxel as switch maintenance therapy post-chemotherapy was assessed in one study with 145 participants. The study did not report hazard rates on overall survival or progression-free survival time, but the difference in median survival times was very small - less than one month. Racotumomab may result in little to no difference in the proportion of people with at least one serious treatment-related adverse event compared with docetaxel (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.44 to 1.83). Personalised peptide vaccine Personalised peptide vaccine plus docetaxel compared to docetaxel plus placebo post-chemotherapy treatment may result in little to no difference in overall survival (HR 0.80, 95% CI 0.42 to 1.52) and progression-free survival (HR 0.78, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.42). OSE2101 The OSE2101 vaccine compared with chemotherapy, after chemotherapy or immunotherapy, was assessed in one study with 219 participants. It may result in little to no difference in overall survival (HR 0.86, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.19). It may result in a small difference in the proportion of people with at least one serious treatment-related adverse event (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.91 to 0.99). SRL172 The SRL172 vaccine of killed Mycobacterium vaccae, added to chemotherapy, compared to chemotherapy alone, may result in no difference in overall survival, and may increase the proportion of people with at least one serious treatment-related adverse event (RR 2.07, 95% CI 1.76 to 2.43; 351 participants). AUTHORS'

conclusionsAdding a vaccine resulted in no differences in overall survival, except for racotumomab, which showed some improvement compared to placebo, but the difference in median survival time was very small (1.4 months) and the study only included 176 participants. Regarding progression-free survival, we observed no differences between the compared treatments, except for TG4010, which may increase progression-free survival slightly. There were no differences between the compared treatments in serious treatment-related adverse events, except for SRL172 (killed Mycobacterium vaccae) added to chemotherapy, which was associated with an increase in the proportion of participants with at least one serious treatment-related adverse event, and OSE2101, which may decrease slightly the proportion of people having at least one serious treatment-related adverse event. These conclusions should be interpreted cautiously, as the very low- to moderate-certainty evidence prevents drawing solid conclusions: many vaccines were evaluated in a single study with small numbers of participants and events.

Indexed as

Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell LungLung NeoplasmsMycobacteriaceaeVaccinesAdultDocetaxelEGF Family of ProteinsFemaleHumansMaleQuality of LifeRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicDocetaxelEGF Family of ProteinsVaccines

Identifiers

PMID38470132
PMCPMC10929364
OpenAlexW4392704095

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.