ArticleFrontiers in oncology2025
Real world treatment patterns for recurrent and metastatic head and neck cancer in the post-KEYNOTE 048 era.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Immunotherapy in Head and Neck Cancer-Where Are We Now and Where Are We Headed?International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Re-defining standards of care in resectable head and neck squamous cell carcinoma-lessons from KEYNOTE-689 and NIVOPOSTOP.The oncologist · 2026Article
- The importance of specificity of drug treatment in head and neck cancer: current developments in personalized medicine to improve safety and tolerability.Expert review of clinical pharmacology · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: While KEYNOTE-048 established anti-PD1 with or without chemotherapy as first-line treatment for recurrent and metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) with combined positive score (CPS) ≥ 1, treatment choice remains ambiguous given additional toxicity of combination treatment. Methods: Patients treated first-line with anti-PD1 monotherapy, anti-PD1+chemotherapy, or cetuximab+chemotherapy in the Flatiron Health database were included. Treatment group differences were assessed with chi-squared and t-tests, and selection factors were analyzed with logistic regressions. Survival was assessed with Kaplan-Meier curves, log-rank tests, and Cox regressions. Results: Of 2577 patients included, Anti-PD1 monotherapy (n=1410) improved survival over cetuximab+chemotherapy (n=577, median survival 14.6 vs. 12.6 months, p=0.015), while anti-PD1+chemotherapy (n=590) showed a nonsignificant trend towards improvement (median survival 14.3 vs. 12.6 months, p=0.053). In HPV-associated disease, survival was equal between regimens. Addition of chemotherapy improved survival over anti-PD1 monotherapy in non-HPV associated tumors with CPS 1-9 (median survival 18.0 vs. 10.3 months, p=0.029) and in oral cavity primaries (median survival 10.3 vs. 7.6 months, p=0.003). Conclusions: Subgroups of patients with recurrent or metastatic HNSCC, including non-HPV associated disease with CPS 1-9 and oral cavity primaries, may derive benefits from the addition of chemotherapy to anti-PD1 therapy.
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.