ArticleFrontiers in immunology2025
Efficacy and safety of immune checkpoint inhibitors in advanced biliary tract cancer: a real-world study.
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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone as the first line treatment for advanced biliary tract cancer: a pooled analysis of KEYNOTE-966 and TOPAZ-1 trails.World journal of surgical oncology · 2025Pooled it
- Response to pembrolizumab after progression on durvalumab in cholangiocarcinoma: a case report of immune checkpoint inhibitor switching.Clinical journal of gastroenterology · 2026Article
- Clinical-radiomics nomogram integrating lymph node radiomic features to predict immunotherapy response in advanced biliary tract cancers.Journal for immunotherapy of cancer · 2025Article
- Durvalumab plus gemcitabine-cisplatin versus S-1 plus gemcitabine-cisplatin in advanced biliary tract cancer: a comparative study.ESMO gastrointestinal oncology · 2025Article
- Single-cell multi-omics in biliary tract cancers: decoding heterogeneity, microenvironment, and treatment strategies.Molecular biomedicine · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
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.