ArticleOncology letters2024
Evaluation of immune checkpoint inhibitors for colorectal cancer: A network meta‑analysis.
Article in Oncology letters, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis non-surgical interventions: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of Cobb angle and SRS-22 outcomes.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2026Pooled it
- Targeting Fusobacterium nucleatum in colorectal cancer: therapeutic strategies and future directions.Infectious agents and cancer · 2025Review
- Prognostic impact of syndecan-1 expression and serum concentration in colorectal cancer.Oncology letters · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Colorectal cancer (CRC) is challenging to treat due to its high metastatic rate. Recent strategies have focused on combining immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) with other treatments. The aim of the present study was to conduct a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to assess the efficacy and adverse effects of different ICI treatments for CRC. A literature search for RCTs was conducted using PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov and Web of Science databases, covering the period from the inception of each database until April 2024. A total of 12 RCTs involving 2,050 participants were selected for inclusion in the analysis. The network meta-analysis employed the MetaInsight tool to assess multiple endpoints. The criteria for study selection were based on the Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome and Studies framework as follows: i) Population, patients with CRC; ii) intervention, studies using ICI to treat CRC; iii) comparison, active comparators, including placebo; iv) outcome, overall survival, progression-free survival, objective response rate and adverse events; and v) study design, RCTs. The results of the analysis revealed that programmed cell death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitors significantly improved overall survival time [mean difference (MD), 2.28 months; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.44 to 4.11], while programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) inhibitors exhibited a superior progression-free survival time (MD, 4.79 months; 95% CI, 3.18 to 6.40) compared with active comparators. However, none of the ICI treatments had significant differences in odds ratios for the objective response rate and adverse events compared with active comparators. These findings indicate that treatment with PD-L1 and PD-1 inhibitors improved the overall survival time and delayed disease progression in patients with CRC. These findings offer valuable insights for future research aimed at improving CRC patient outcomes.
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.