SynthesisFrontiers in oncology2025
The benefits and risks of adding PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors to chemotherapy for stage IIIb-IV non-small-cell lung cancer: an updated meta-analysis based on phase 3 randomized controlled trials.
Synthesis 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 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Optimizing PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors plus chemotherapy for driver mutation-negative non-squamous NSCLC in China: a cost-effectiveness analysis.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Article
- Concurrent therapy-related acute myeloid leukemia and lymph node tuberculosis following treatment for lung squamous cell carcinoma: a case report and literature review.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Previous research has confirmed that integrating PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors with chemotherapy (PC) represents a more effective strategy for treating advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, with the increasing number of phase 3 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in recent years, it is essential to re-evaluate the validity of this conclusion and to comprehensively assess the efficacy and safety across diverse patient subgroups. Methods: We systematically reviewed phase 3 RCTs comparing PC with chemotherapy alone for stage IIIb-IV NSCLC. Data were extracted and analyzed for overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), response rates, and adverse events (AEs). Subgroup analyses were performed based on factors such as disease stage, pathological type, etc. Results: After screening, 19 phase 3 RCTs involving 9335 patients were included. Our updated analysis confirmed at PC therapy significantly improves OS (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.73 [0.69, 0.77], P < 0.00001), PFS (HR: 0.56 [0.52, 0.60], P < 0.00001), duration of response (DOR, HR: 0.50 [0.45, 0.54], P < 0.00001) and objective response rate (ORR, risk ratio [RR]: 1.59 [1.51, 1.67], P < 0.00001) compared to chemotherapy alone. The survival benefits were consistent across all subgroups and increases with longer follow-up. Brain metastases and PD-L1 combined positive score (CPS) > 50% were the favorable factors for PC group. However, the combined treatment was associated with an increased incidence of total/grade 3-5 treatment emergent AEs (TEAEs), and immune-related AEs (irAEs), although the overall safety profile remained manageable. The most common AEs in the PC group were blood toxicity related AEs (anemia, neutrophil count decreased, etc). Conclusion: The PC therapy continues to provide a substantial survival benefit for patients with stage IIIb-IV NSCLC. However, its higher incidence of AEs, especially irAEs, needs to be taken seriously. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD420251005925, identifier CRD420251005925.
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.