ReviewFrontiers in pharmacology2025
The efficacy and safety of tislelizumab in the treatment of locally advanced or metastatic lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in Frontiers in pharmacology, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: The clinical role of Tislelizumab in patients with locally advanced or metastatic lung cancer (LC) remains controversial. This study aims to systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of Tislelizumab in treating these patients through a meta-analysis. Methods: Databases including PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Web of Science were searched up to 19 May 2025. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and single-arm studies assessing the efficacy and safety of Tislelizumab for locally advanced or metastatic LC were included. Literature screening and data extraction were performed according to the PRISMA guidelines, and pooled odds ratios (OR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using STATA 15.0 software. Results: A total of 8 studies were included, of which 5 were RCTs and 3 were single-arm studies. In the RCT subgroup, the Tislelizumab group demonstrated a higher objective response rate (ORR) [OR = 2.29, 95%CI(1.43,3.64), P = 0.001] and disease control rate (DCR) [OR = 1.64, 95%CI(1.30,2.07), P < 0.001] compared to the control group, but no significant differences were found in overall survival (OS) [OR = 0.81, 95%CI(0.60,1.10), P = 0.179] or progression-free survival (PFS) [OR = 0.74, 95%CI(0.39,1.41), P = 0.364]. Single-arm study data indicated that Tislelizumab treatment achieved a high ORR [OR = 0.54, 95%CI (0.34,0.74), P < 0.001] and DCR [OR = 0.86, 95%CI (0.78,0.92), P < 0.001]. Subgroup analysis revealed that Tislelizumab had similar effects on ORR and DCR in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and small cell lung cancer (SCLC). Conclusion: The meta-analysis results suggest that Tislelizumab demonstrates significant short-term efficacy (ORR and DCR) in patients with locally advanced or metastatic LC. However, the existing evidence is inadequate to confirm its long-term survival benefits (OS and PFS), and more high-quality studies are needed for validation.
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.