SynthesisBMC cancer2025
Unlocking the potential of immune checkpoint inhibitors in advanced cervical cancer: a meta-analysis and systematic review.
Synthesis in BMC cancer, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Efficacy and safety of immune checkpoint inhibitors with chemoradiotherapy/chemotherapy in locally advanced cervical cancer patients: a systematic review and single-arm meta-analysis.Journal of gynecologic oncology · 2026Pooled it
- Downregulation of miR-3074-5p slows cervical cancer progression by targeting TGFBR2 expression.Irish journal of medical science · 2026Article
- Precision management of cervical cancer emphasizes immunotherapy combination regimens and translational advances.Discover oncology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThis meta-analysis systematically evaluated the effectiveness and safety of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in treating advanced cervical cancer, emphasizing their potential as transformative therapeutic options in this complex clinical landscape.
methodsEMBASE, Web of Science, PubMed, and the Cochrane Library were thoroughly searched for articles on the outcomes of ICIs in advanced cervical cancer patients. A pooled analysis was performed to evaluate the objective response rate (ORR: reported as an odds ratio (OR), progression-free survival (PFS; hazard ratio (HR), overall survival (OS; HR), and safety outcomes risk ratio (RR). Subgroup and sensitivity analyses were also conducted to identify potential sources of bias and heterogeneity.
resultsOur meta-analysis included 5 studies involving 3,112 patients. Compared with standard therapies, treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) significantly improved the objective response rate (ORR; OR = 1.68, 95% CI = 1.27-2.23), prolonged progression-free survival (PFS; HR = 0.72, 95% CI = 0.65-0.80), and extended overall survival (OS; HR = 0.69, 95% CI = 0.61-0.79). Subgroup analyses revealed potential predictors of treatment response. Moreover, ICIs exhibit a manageable safety profile, with adverse events consistent with known immune-related toxicities.
conclusionThis meta-analysis highlights the promising efficacy and favourable safety profile of immune checkpoint inhibitors in advanced cervical cancer. These findings suggest a paradigm shift in treatment strategies, with ICIs emerging as a potential cornerstone therapy. Further research is warranted to elucidate optimal patient selection, combination therapies, and long-term outcomes. This study provides valuable insights for clinicians and researchers, paving the way for personalized and effective treatment approaches for advanced cervical cancer.
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.