Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40230857›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in immunology2025

Efficacy and safety of immune checkpoint inhibitors in advanced biliary tract cancer: a real-world study.

Yichen Zheng, Jiamin Guo, Tonghui Ren, Ji Ma, Dan Cao

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in immunology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Yichen Zheng *Department of Medical Oncology, Cancer Center and Laboratory of Molecular Targeted Therapy in Oncology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China.
Jiamin Guo *Department of Medical Oncology, Cancer Center and Laboratory of Molecular Targeted Therapy in Oncology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China.
Tonghui RenDepartment of Medical Oncology, Cancer Center and Laboratory of Molecular Targeted Therapy in Oncology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China.
Ji MaDepartment of Medical Oncology, Cancer Center and Laboratory of Molecular Targeted Therapy in Oncology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China.
Dan CaoDepartment of Medical Oncology, Cancer Center and Laboratory of Molecular Targeted Therapy in Oncology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) combined with gemcitabine and cisplatin chemotherapy have become the standard first-line treatment for advanced biliary tract cancer (BTC). However, real-world evidence on domestic ICIs widely used in China and the therapeutic outcomes across treatment lines remains limited. This study aimed to assess the real-world effectiveness and safety profiles of ICIs in advanced BTC patients, while concurrently elucidating potential efficacy variations among distinct ICI subtypes. Methods: We analyzed patients with unresectable, locally advanced, or metastatic BTC treated with ICIs at West China Hospital (January 2019-October 2023). Primary endpoint was overall survival (OS), while secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), and safety. Kaplan-Meier survival curves, propensity score matching (PSM), and Cox proportional hazards regression analyzed treatment efficacy. Results: A total of 221 advanced BTC patients were enrolled. Among them, 137 patients received ICIs treatment in the first line, while 84 patients in the second or later lines. For patients treated with ICIs as first-line therapy, the median OS was 15.7 months (95% CI: 13.1-19.8) and PFS was 8.4 months (95% CI: 7.6-10.3). In contrast, patients treated in second or later lines had shorter median OS of 9.8 months (95% CI: 8.1-12.3) and median PFS of 5.6 months (95% CI: 4.2-6.8). The reduced efficacy in later-line treatments may reflect prior therapeutic resistance and generally poorer patient conditions compared to first-line recipients. 211 (95.5%) patients experienced at least one adverse event (AE), and 93 (42.1%) of them experienced grade 3 or higher AEs. The incidence of immune-related adverse events (irAEs) was 35.8%, with 8.6% of patients experiencing grade 3-4 irAEs. The most common ICI treatments are with Durvalumab or Sintilimab, which we are interested in comparing. Durvalumab showed numerically superior OS vs Sintilimab (19.3 vs 10.2 months, p<0.001) in unmatched analysis, though significance attenuated after PSM (16.1 vs 13.1 months, p=0.299). Conclusion: ICIs demonstrate robust efficacy and manageable toxicity in real-world settings, supporting their use in both first- and later-line treatments for advanced BTC. However, whether domestic ICI alternatives remain viable options warranting further validation.

Indexed as

Biliary Tract NeoplasmsImmune Checkpoint InhibitorsAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeImmune Checkpoint Inhibitorsbiliary tract cancerefficacyfirst-lineimmune checkpoint inhibitorsreal-world studysafetysecond or later lines

Identifiers

PMID40230857
PMCPMC11994646

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.