ReviewCardio-oncology (London, England)2024
Immune checkpoint inhibitor-induced cardiotoxicity in patients with lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in Cardio-oncology (London, England), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- A narrative review of immune checkpoint inhibitor-related cardiotoxicity in lung cancer: mechanisms, risk stratification, and clinical management.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Review
- Trends in the Overall Incidence and Mortality of Lung Cancer: An Extensive Longitudinal Study Utilizing the CDC WONDER Database 1999-2020.Thoracic cancer · 2026Article
- Bibliometric analysis of research trends and collaboration patterns in cardio-oncology focusing on lung cancer and heart failure.Discover oncology · 2026Article
- A Tale of Two Periods: The Evolution of Determinants and CVD Mortality Risk in Metastatic NSCLC.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Article
- Targeting molecular pathways to control immune checkpoint inhibitor toxicities.Trends in immunology · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe use of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) for the treatment of lung cancer may precipitate cardiotoxic events. We aimed to perform a meta-analysis to evaluate the cardiotoxicity associated with ICIs in patients with lung cancer.
methodsA literature search was conducted across four electronic databases (Cochrane CENTRAL, MEDLINE, OVID EMBASE and Google Scholar) from inception through 31st May 2023. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the impact of ICIs on cardiac outcomes in lung cancer patients were considered for inclusion. Risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were pooled and analysis was performed using a random-effects model. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach was followed to assess confidence in the estimates of effect (i.e., the quality of evidence).
resultsA total of 30 studies including 16,331 patients, were included in the analysis. Pooled results showed that single ICI (RR: 2.15; 95% CI: 1.13-4.12; p = 0.02; I2 = 0%) or a combination of single ICI plus chemotherapy (RR: 1.38 [1.05-1.82]; p = 0.02) significantly increased the risk of cardiac adverse events when compared with chemotherapy alone. No significant difference was noted when a dual ICI (RR: 0.48 [0.13-1.80]; p = 0.27) was compared with single ICI. In addition, there was no significant association between the use of ICIs and incidence of cardiac failure (RR: 1.11 [0.48-2.58]; p = 0.80), or arrhythmia (RR: 1.87; [0.69-5.08]; p = 0.22).
conclusionCompared with chemotherapy alone, use of a single ICI or a combination of single ICI plus chemotherapy significantly increased the risk of cardiotoxicity. However, employing dual immunotherapy did not result in a significant increase in the risk of cardiotoxicity when compared to the use of a single ICI.
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.