ArticleThe oncologist2025
Efficacy outcomes between tarlatamab and real-world physicians' choice of therapies for previously treated extensive stage small cell lung cancer.
Article in The oncologist, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Matching-Adjusted Indirect Comparison of Tarlatamab for Patients with Platinum-Refractory or Platinum-Resistant Extensive-Stage Small-Cell Lung Cancer.Advances in therapy · 2026Trial
- Generation of an NG2 targeting bispecific antibody for the induction of T-cell immunity against melanoma.Journal of translational medicine · 2026Article
- Survival trends in extensive-stage small cell lung cancer in the pre-immunotherapy and immunotherapy eras: a population-based SEER study.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTarlatamab, a bispecific T-cell engager immunotherapy, showed durable response with promising survival outcomes in patients with previously treated small cell lung cancer (SCLC) in the phase 2 DeLLphi-301 study. Given the lack of a comparator in DeLLphi-301, this analysis aimed to evaluate the relative efficacy of tarlatamab against physicians' choice of therapies in real-world practice. PATIENTS AND
methodsThis analysis compared the outcomes of patients in DeLLphi-301 who received tarlatamab 10 mg (n = 97) with patients in real-world cancer clinics captured in the Flatiron Health database who received third or later-line comparator therapies for SCLC (n = 184). Propensity score weighting was used to adjust for differences in key prognostic factors between cohorts. Overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), time to treatment discontinuation (TTD), time to next treatment or death (TTNTD), and objective response rate (ORR) were compared after weighting.
resultsTarlatamab was associated with significantly longer OS, PFS, TTD, and TTNTD, and higher ORR vs comparator therapies. After weighting, the hazard ratios (95% confidence interval [CI]) of tarlatamab vs comparator therapies were 0.45 (0.30, 0.68) for OS, 0.61 (0.43, 0.90) for PFS, 0.57 (0.39, 0.84) for TTD, and 0.45 (0.30, 0.66) for TTNTD. The odds ratio for ORR was 2.80 (95% CI, 1.44, 5.83).
conclusionThe study findings suggest that tarlatamab offers potential clinical benefits relative to comparator treatments. This analysis underscores the potential of tarlatamab to become a new therapeutic option for previously treated SCLC, a disease that has historically been associated with extremely poor outcomes and limited treatment options.
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.