ReviewCancers2025
Health-Related Quality of Life in the Era of Immune Checkpoint Blockade: What Do Patient-Reported Outcomes Reveal?
Review in Cancers, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Quality of life and care experience in durable responders to immune checkpoint inhibitors for advanced or metastatic NSCLC or melanoma.Immuno-oncology technology · 2026Article
- Can It Be that Metabolic Syndrome Protect against Breast Cancer.Cardiovascular drugs and therapy · 2026Article
- Patient-reported quality-of-life outcomes in immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy: addressing gaps, capturing patient experience, and advancing the field.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026Review
- Sustained metabolic response in metastatic melanoma after intraperitoneal ozone therapy: a case report.AME case reports · 2026Article
- PD-L1-stratified health-related quality of life in solid tumors: pembrolizumab versus chemotherapy-a narrative review.Frontiers in medicine · 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundImmune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have revolutionized cancer treatment by providing durable survival gains, but understanding their effects on patient health-related quality of life (HRQL) is critical.
methodsWe performed a narrative review of cross-sectional surveys, early-phase trials, and large-scale phase II and III randomized controlled clinical trials assessing FDA-approved ICIs, including programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) inhibitors, programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitors, and cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated antigen 4 (CTLA-4) inhibitors, with emphasis on patient-reported HRQL. Validated HRQL instruments were summarized, and for pivotal trials, the positioning of HRQL outcomes as primary, secondary, or exploratory endpoints was taken from original protocols or primary manuscripts.
resultsICIs generally preserved or improved HRQL in patients with various malignancies compared with chemotherapy, targeted therapies, or observation. PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors maintained global health and function and delayed symptom progression in patients with lung cancer, melanoma, and renal cell carcinoma. Regimens combining CTLA-4 blockade and PD-1/PD-L1 inhibition (e.g., nivolumab + ipilimumab, durvalumab + tremelimumab) are associated with HRQL outcomes similar or superior to those of targeted therapies. Overall, most immune-related adverse effects were short-term and did not diminish HRQL benefits.
conclusionsICIs extend survival while preserving, and often enhancing, patient HRQL. These medications represent a shift in oncology, offering not just longer life but also better daily well-being. Continued long-term patient-reported outcome monitoring is essential to guide survivorship care in the immunotherapy era.
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.