ReviewCureus2025
The Importance of Timing in Immunotherapy: A Systematic Review.
Review in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Unlocking the clock: a systematic review and meta-analysis on optimizing immune checkpoint inhibitor timing for advanced solid tumors.British journal of cancer · 2026Article
- Chronotherapy in Hematological Malignancies: Evaluating the Rationale and Evidence.Pharmacology research & perspectives · 2026Review
- Circadian-guided oncolytic virotherapy for glioblastoma.Journal of neurovirology · 2026Review
- Eating during immunotherapy sessions: a cross-sectional study of meal quality in patients with rheumatic diseases undergoing intravenous therapy with immunomodulators.Clinical rheumatology · 2026Article
- Circadian rhythms and lung cancer biology and immunotherapy: Emerging opportunities and challenges.Chinese medical journal pulmonary and critical care medicine · 2026Review
- Circadian engineering of in vivo CAR T cell therapy for precision oncology.NPJ precision oncology · 2026Review
- Nervous and immune system crosstalk shapes cancer progression and treatment response.Discover oncology · 2026Review
- ChronoimmunoTOX: A Single-Institution Retrospective Study on How the Time of Administration Impacts Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Efficacy and Toxicity in Melanoma.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cancer remains a significant global health concern, with conventional treatments such as surgery, chemotherapy, and radiation posing considerable risks. In recent years, immunotherapy, particularly immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), has emerged as a first-line treatment. ICIs enhance the immune system's ability to target and destroy cancer cells by blocking inhibitory proteins on T-cells. The body's circadian clock regulates essential biological functions, including immune response and metabolism, and its disruption can create an immunosuppressive environment conducive to tumor progression. Chronotherapy, which examines the influence of circadian rhythms on treatment efficacy, presents a promising approach to optimizing immunotherapy outcomes. This systematic review explores whether the timing of immunotherapy administration affects key patient outcomes, including overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), response rates, and mortality. A total of 21 studies involving 3,682 patients with a mean age of 64.7 were analyzed. Immunotherapy was administered for various cancers, the most common being melanoma, non-small cell lung cancer, and renal cell carcinoma. Only ICIs were considered, including monotherapies of nivolumab, pembrolizumab, atezolizumab, durvalumab, ipilimumab, camrelizumab, tislelizumab, sintilimab, and combination therapies of nivolumab plus ipilimumab or ICIs with additional agents such as atezolizumab with bevacizumab or pembrolizumab with axitinib. Infusion timing varied across studies, with cutoff points for early versus late administration ranging from 11:37 to 16:30, the most common being 16:30. Most studies reported improved OS and PFS in patients receiving earlier infusions, with survival benefits ranging from +2.7 to +26.6 months, with a mean of +15.1 months, and PFS extensions from -0.5 to +28.3 months, with a mean of +8.1 months. Additionally, complete and partial response rates were higher in early infusion groups. However, findings on mortality rates were inconsistent. These results suggest that the timing of immunotherapy administration may significantly impact treatment efficacy, potentially due to interactions with circadian rhythms. Further research is needed to establish standardized guidelines for optimizing infusion timing to enhance patient outcomes.
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.