ArticleFrontiers in pharmacology2024
A network comparison on efficacy and safety profiling of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors in first-line treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer.
Article in Frontiers in pharmacology, 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.
- Checkpoint inhibitor pneumonitis in lung cancer patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors prior to chest radiotherapy.BMC cancer · 2026Article
- Effectiveness and safety of combination immunotherapy with or without ipilimumab according to PD-L1 expression in patients with non-small cell lung cancer: a multi-center retrospective cohort study.Translational lung cancer research · 2026Article
- The theoretical impact of AI-based quality evaluation of short-video health information on public cognition and treatment adherence: a case study of denosumab combined with PD-1/PD-L1 therapy for lung cancer bone metastasis.Frontiers in public health · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors are novel immunotherapeutic agents that have been approved for first-line treatment in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). This study aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors, which have completed phase 3 clinical trials, as a first-line treatment in patients with advanced NSCLC. Materials and methods: A systematic search of PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library was performed to extract eligible literature up to October 2023. Findings included overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs). Furthermore, subgroup analyses were conducted based on PD-L1 expression levels and histological type. Results: We analyzed 29 studies including 18,885 patients. In analyses of all patients, penpulimab plus chemotherapy led the way for OS (HR 0.55, 95% CI: 0.40-0.75) and PFS (HR 0.43, 95% CI: 0.27-0.67). Regarding OS, for patients with PD-L1 expression ≥50%, 1%-49% and <1%, camrelizumab + chemotherapy (HR 0.48, 95% CI: 0.21-1.11), cemiplimab + chemotherapy (HR 0.50, 95% CI: 0.32-0.79) and nivolumab + ipilimumab (HR 0.64, 95% CI: 0.51-0.81) were considered optimal treatments. Compared with chemotherapy, monotherapy with nivolumab, cemiplimab, pembrolizumab, atezolizumab and durvalumab had lower odds of TRAE grade ≥3. Conclusion: In all patients, penpulimab plus chemotherapy was the most effective therapy, but treatment preferences varied by PD-L1 expression, histology type and associated outcomes. Safety at the individual patient level must be a high priority in the decision-making process. Further validation is warranted.
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.