SynthesisBMC cancer2024
Prognostic and predictive factors in advanced upper gastrointestinal cancer treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the current evidence.
Synthesis in BMC 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.
- Pretreatment emotional distress and peripheral biomarkers predict immune checkpoint inhibitor response in people with advanced inoperable gastroesophageal cancer.Communications medicine · 2026Article
- Virus-driven remodeling of the immune microenvironment and response to immune checkpoint inhibitors: the infection- immunity-cancer crosstalk.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundImmune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have shown encouraging treatment efficacy for upper gastrointestinal cancers (UGICs). However, durable clinical responses only existed in a minority of patients. We evaluated evidence predicting survival benefits to identify the optimal population followed by ICI-based therapy.
methodsA comprehensive search was performed using PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science to identify clinical trials for UGICs with ICI-based therapy. The outcomes were objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). The quality of evidence was evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation System (GRADE).
resultsThirty-six studies comprising 12,440 patients were included for quantitative synthesis. Patients with PD-L1-positive (OR = 2.08, p < 0.00001), EBV+ (OR = 8.47, p = 0.003) tumors were more likely to respond to ICI treatment. Moreover, OS was significantly improved with the statistical subgroup difference concerning sex (p = 0.02) and region (p = 0.02). An exploratory subgroup analysis showed significantly improved OS with ICI plus chemotherapy in patients with CPS ≥ 10 (HR = 0.66, p = 0.001) and CPS ≥ 1 (HR = 0.75, p < 0.00001).
conclusionUGIC patients with PD-L1-positive, EBV + status are associated with a better therapeutic response to ICI-based therapy. The male patients and Asian patients could derive more survival benefits following ICI treatment than female and non-Asian ones. A combination of prognostic and predictive factors was suggested to help guide immunotherapy decision-making in UGIC patients.
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.