ArticleBMC cancer2024
The outcome of advanced and recurrent cervical cancer patients treated with first-line platinum and paclitaxel with or without indication for immune checkpoint inhibitors: the comparative study.
Article in BMC cancer, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Lactylation-based machine algorithm combined with multi-omics analysis to predict prognosis in cervical cancer.Oncology letters · 2026Article
- Comparative Anticancer Activity of Extract, Partitions, and a Two-Acetogenin Mixture from Mexican Creole Avocado Seed.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- The promise of PD1/PDL1 targeted immunotherapy in locally advanced cervical cancer: a game-changer for patients outcome?Frontiers 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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveImmune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy activates the immune system to recognize and eliminate cancer cells that have escaped surveillance. This study aimed to compare the treatment outcome of advanced and recurrent cervical cancer patients treated with first-line platinum and paclitaxel with or without ICI.
methodsData from 69 advanced and recurrent cervical cancer patients treated with first-line ICI plus platinum and paclitaxel (N = 33) or first-line platinum and paclitaxel (N = 36) were reviewed between March 2020 and January 2023 in this retrospective study. Patients chose treatment based on the actual disease condition, patient willingness, and medical advice. Additionally, objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) were calculated, and adverse events were gained.
resultsThere was no difference in baseline data between patients receiving the two different treatments (all P > 0.05). Complete response rate (18.2% vs. 8.3%; P = 0.294), ORR (48.5% vs. 30.6%; P = 0.127), and DCR (81.8% vs. 72.2%; P = 0.345) tended to ascend in patients treated with ICI plus platinum and paclitaxel compared to those treated with platinum and paclitaxel, although there was no statistical significance. In patients treated with ICI plus platinum and paclitaxel, the median PFS was 10.3 months and the median OS was not reached. Meanwhile, the median PFS and OS were 7.7 and 16.9 months in patients treated with platinum and paclitaxel. PFS (P = 0.036) and OS (P = 0.033) were increased in patients treated with ICI plus platinum and paclitaxel versus those treated with platinum and paclitaxel, which was verified by multivariate Cox regression analyses (both P < 0.05). No difference was observed in the occurrence of adverse events between patients receiving the two different treatments (all P > 0.05).
conclusionFirst-line ICI plus platinum and paclitaxel yields better treatment responses, longer survival, and non-differential adverse events versus first-line platinum and paclitaxel in advanced and recurrent cervical cancer 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.