ArticleJournal of thoracic disease2025
Neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy versus chemoradiotherapy for non-small cell lung cancer: a comparative analysis of clinical outcomes and pathologic response.
Article in Journal of thoracic disease, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Advances in Radiotherapy for Neoadjuvant Therapy of Stage III Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.Cancer science · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: While neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy (neoCIT) has been increasingly adopted for locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), there is a lack of direct comparison with neoadjuvant concurrent chemoradiotherapy (neoCCRT), which has long been used to enhance local tumor control. This gap presents a clinical dilemma, as both approaches are associated with distinct mechanisms and potential trade-offs in efficacy and safety. In this study, we aimed to compare the clinical outcomes and pathological responses to neoCIT and neoCCRT in patients with locally advanced NSCLC. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 71 patients with locally advanced NSCLC who received either neoCCRT (n=38) or neoCIT (n=33), followed by surgical resection between January 2010 and April 2024. Pathological response was assessed using the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer criteria, and clinical outcomes, including postoperative complications, recurrence, and survival, were compared. Results: Baseline characteristics were balanced except for histology. Squamous carcinoma was predominant in the neoCIT group, whereas non-squamous histology was more common in the neoCCRT group. The neoCCRT group achieved significantly higher major pathological response (MPR) rates (55.3% Conclusions: neoCCRT and neoCIT demonstrate comparable safety and survival outcomes in patients with locally advanced NSCLC. While neoCCRT led to higher MPR rates, this did not correspond to improved survival. Treatment selection should be individualized based on tumor burden, histologic subtype, and risk of distant metastasis.
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.