ArticleJTO clinical and research reports2025
Primary Results from IMscin002: A Study to Evaluate Patient Preferences and Perceptions of Health Care Professionals for Atezolizumab Subcutaneous Versus Intravenous for the Treatment of NSCLC.
Article in JTO clinical and research reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. It is linked to trial NCT05171777 (A Randomized, Multicenter, Open-Label Cross-Over Study to Evaluate Participant and Healthcare Professional Reported Preference for Subcutaneous Atezolizumab Compared With Intravenous Atezolizumab Formulation in Participants With Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer), which is not on this map. Cited by 7 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.
A Randomized, Multicenter, Open-Label Cross-Over Study to Evaluate Participant and Healthcare Professional Reported Preference for Subcutaneous Atezolizumab Compared With Intravenous Atezolizumab Formulation in Participants With Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Transition from Parenteral to Subcutaneous Application of Systemic Oncological Therapy for Treating Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2026Pooled it
- Patient characteristics to guide personalized treatment decisions and prognostication in hepatocellular carcinoma.Hepatic oncology · 2026Review
- At-home subcutaneous atezolizumab for non-small cell lung cancer: a prospective, single-arm phase II feasibility study.Lung cancer management · 2026Article
- Pharmacokinetic insights into atezolizumab SC: viability of extended dosing intervals beyond the standard regimen.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2026Review
- Exploratory Analyses of Patient Preferences for Atezolizumab Subcutaneous Versus Intravenous from the IMscin002 Study in Patients with Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.Oncology and therapy · 2026Article
- Comparison of subcutaneous checkpoint inhibitor immunotherapeutic agents.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Article
- Subcutaneous administration of pembrolizumab: a paradigm shift toward patient-centered cancer care.Journal of thoracic disease · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Subcutaneous (SC) atezolizumab, a co-formulation containing atezolizumab and recombinant human hyaluronidase PH20), has been approved for use in more than 50 countries for the same indications as intravenous (IV) atezolizumab. IMscin002 (NCT05171777), a phase 2, randomized, open-label, crossover trial, investigated patient preferences and health care professionals' (HCPs') perceptions of atezolizumab SC versus IV for the treatment of NSCLC; we report the primary results of IMscin002. Methods: Patients with programmed death-ligand 1-positive resected NSCLC who had completed adjuvant chemotherapy without evidence of recurrence, and chemotherapy-naive patients with programmed death-ligand 1-high metastatic NSCLC were randomized 1:1 to arm A (atezolizumab SC then atezolizumab IV) or arm B (atezolizumab IV then atezolizumab SC). After cycle 3, patients switched administration routes. After cycle 6, the patients chose the route of administration for the continuation period. The primary end point was patient preference for SC or IV atezolizumab, and the secondary end points were patient- and HCP-reported outcomes and safety. Results: A total of 179 patients were included in this study. Most patients (70.7%; n = 87 of 123) preferred SC atezolizumab over IV, with 79.4% (n = 85 of 107) choosing SC atezolizumab during the continuation period. Among the HCPs, 75.2% (n = 76 of 101) indicated that atezolizumab SC was more convenient than IV, and 77.8% (n = 77 of 99) strongly agreed or agreed that it would allow patients to spend less time in care units. No new or unexpected safety findings were identified, and switching between administration routes was well tolerated and managed. Conclusions: Most patients preferred SC atezolizumab over IV. There were no new safety findings, and switching between the administration routes was well tolerated. These results support the preference for SC formulations to reduce the treatment burden.
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.