ReviewAnnals of medicine and surgery (2012)2025
Safety, efficacy, and quality of life with cemiplimab treatment among non-small cell lung cancer patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in Annals of medicine and surgery (2012), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitors have shown promise in treating advanced non-small cell lung cancer and have a solid safety profile. Cemiplimab can be used as monotherapy or in combination with chemotherapy for both squamous and non-squamous cancers. We opted for a systematic review and meta-analysis to find out the efficacy outcome and safety profile along with quality-of-life data of cemiplimab for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Methods: A rigorous search of literature on PubMed, Embase, and Google Scholar was done to find relevant published publications till December 1, 2023. Outcomes like objective response rate (ORR), overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), common side effects, and quality of life among the cemiplimab and the control group were used to conduct meta-analysis using the fixed/random effect model for combined odds ratio (OR), combined hazard ratio (HR) and mean difference at confidence interval (CI) of 95%. Results: Two randomized clinical trials EMPOWER 1 and EMPOWER 3 with 1092 advanced NSCLC patients along with their follow-up studies were included. There was significantly higher OS (HR = 0.62 [0.54, 0.70], Conclusion: With regard to OS, PFS, ORR, quality of life scores, and an acceptable safety profile in advanced non-small cell lung cancer, cemiplimab showed clinically relevant and statistically significant improvements making it standard of care for such patients.
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.