SynthesisThe oncologist2024
Safety, efficacy, and survival outcomes of immune checkpoint inhibitors rechallenge in patients with cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in The oncologist, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Advancing immune checkpoint inhibitor rechallenge: key insights into efficacy, safety, and personalized strategies in advanced solid tumors.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Pooled it
- Camrelizumab Plus Nab-paclitaxel in Patients with Previously Treated Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma: A Multicenter Phase II Study.Cancer communications (London, England) · 2026Trial
- Type 3 Autoimmune Pancreatitis: What Do We Know So Far?Digestive diseases and sciences · 2026Review
- NKR-P1A/CD161: A Multifunctional Immune Receptor at the Crossroads of Antitumor Immunity.Biomolecules · 2026Review
- Re-Exposure of a PD-1 Inhibitor After Previous Immune-Related Adverse Events.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2026Article
- Targeting T-Cells for Cancer Treatment: Current Clinical Strategies and Challenges.Biomedicines · 2026Review
- Assessment of pneumonitis in patients with lung cancer undergoing radioimmunotherapy and immune checkpoint inhibitor rechallenge.Communications medicine · 2026Article
- Article
- Targeting metabolic-epigenetic-immune axis in cancer: molecular mechanisms and therapeutic implications.Signal transduction and targeted therapy · 2026Review
- PD-1 inhibitor-induced systemic sclerosis with early interstitial lung disease and autoimmune thyroiditis in advanced gastric cancer: a case report and literature review.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Life-threatening immune-related adverse events in the intensive care unit: a narrative review.Intensive care medicine · 2025Review
- Pan-cancer analysis identifies LMBR1L as a prognostic and immunological biomarker with validation in colorectal cancer.European journal of medical research · 2025Article
- Cadonilimab rechallenge in patients with recurrent or metastatic cervical cancer following prior PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor failure: a retrospective multicenter study.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Article
- Urgent considerations on renal immune-related adverse events in oncology practice.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Review
- Resumption of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Therapy Following Immune-related Adverse Events.In vivo (Athens, Greece)Review
- Gemcitabine, Cisplatin, and Durvalumab for Alpha-Fetoprotein-Producing Cancer of Unknown Primary Suspected from the Biliary Tract: A Case Report.Case reports in oncologyArticle
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundsThere is little evidence on the safety, efficacy, and survival benefit of restarting immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) in patients with cancer after discontinuation due to immune-related adverse events (irAEs) or progressive disease (PD). Here, we performed a meta-analysis to elucidate the possible benefits of ICI rechallenge in patients with cancer.
methodsSystematic searches were conducted using PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases. The objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and incidence of irAEs were the outcomes of interest.
resultsThirty-six studies involving 2026 patients were analyzed. ICI rechallenge was associated with a lower incidence of all-grade (OR, 0.05; 95%CI, 0.02-0.13, P < .05) and high-grade irAEs (OR, 0.37; 95%CI, 0.21-0.64, P < .05) when compared with initial ICI treatment. Though no significant difference was observed between rechallenge and initial treatment regarding ORR (OR, 0.69; 95%CI, 0.39-1.20, P = .29) and DCR (OR, 0.85; 95%CI, 0.51-1.40, P = 0.52), patients receiving rechallenge had improved PFS (HR, 0.56; 95%CI, 0.43-0.73, P < .05) and OS (HR, 0.55; 95%CI, 0.43-0.72, P < .05) than those who discontinued ICI therapy permanently. Subgroup analysis revealed that for patients who stopped initial ICI treatment because of irAEs, rechallenge showed similar safety and efficacy with initial treatment, while for patients who discontinued ICI treatment due to PD, rechallenge caused a significant increase in the incidence of high-grade irAEs (OR, 4.97; 95%CI, 1.98-12.5, P < .05) and a decrease in ORR (OR, 0.48; 95%CI, 0.24-0.95, P < .05).
conclusionICI rechallenge is generally an active and feasible strategy that is associated with relative safety, similar efficacy, and improved survival outcomes. Rechallenge should be considered individually with circumspection, and randomized controlled trials are required to confirm these findings.
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.