ArticleJournal of gastrointestinal cancer2024
Efficacy and Safety of Salvage-line Nivolumab Monotherapy for Advanced Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma: Comparison of 240 mg Versus 480 mg Doses.
Article in Journal of gastrointestinal cancer, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Advances in Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy-An Overview of Recent Developments and a Novel Classification of Innovations in Treatment of Thoracic Esophageal Cancer.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNivolumab monotherapy is the standard second-line treatment for advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) after failure of platinum-based chemotherapy without anti-PD-1 antibody. Fixed dosing with 240 mg every 2 weeks was approved initially, followed by fixed dosing with 480 mg every 4 weeks based on pharmacokinetics data. However, information on the comparative efficacy and safety of the two doses remains limited.
methodsWe compared progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), and the incidence of adverse events (AEs) between the two doses in 117 patients who received second-line (n = 85) or later-line (n = 32) nivolumab monotherapy at our institution between January 2016 and December 2021.
resultsIn the second-line group, patient characteristics for the 240 mg and 480 mg groups were as follows (240 mg vs. 480 mg): performance status (PS) 0/1/2 was 34/61/5% vs. 54/42/4%, and prior fluoropyrimidine plus platinum therapy (FP) was 81.3% vs. 42.3%. In the later-line group, the characteristics were: PS 0/1/2 was 28/60/12% vs. 14/86/0%, and prior FP was 60.0% vs. 42.8%. ORR was 11.9 vs. 24.0% in the second-line group (p = 0.19) and 0 vs. 14.3% in the later-line group (p = 0.22). Median PFS was 1.7 vs. 4.1 months on second-line (hazard ratio [HR] 0.60, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.35-1.01, p = 0.056) and 1.4 vs. 1.8 months on later-line (HR 0.58, 95% CI 0.23-1.46, p = 0.25); AEs of any grade were observed in 58.3 vs. 69.7%, respectively.
conclusionsThe efficacy and safety of the two doses of nivolumab monotherapy were comparable in patients with advanced ESCC.
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.