ReviewCureus2025
Evaluation of the Clinical Impact of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors (Atezolizumab and Pembrolizumab) in the Treatment of Triple-Negative Breast Cancer: A Meta-Analysis and Review of Literature.
Review in Cureus, 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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) refers to a distinct subclass of breast cancer with the absence of estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) expression, making it a clinically challenging subtype with fewer therapeutic pathways. Not only are these tumors unresponsive to receptor-targeted treatments, but also they typically manifest increased metastatic potential and invasiveness, high relapse rate, and poor outcomes. As such, there is a compelling clinical need for novel TNBC treatment regimens. A range of different therapeutic approaches are being investigated, including the use of immunotherapeutic agents. In this meta-analysis, we set out to evaluate the potential for using immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), targeting either programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) or programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1), in TNBC. A keyword search was performed using three databases, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Scopus, and PubMed, to identify potential studies to be included in a meta-analysis. Studies comparing the use of immune checkpoint inhibitors in combination with standard-of-care chemotherapy for the treatment of patients with TNBC were identified. The data from all the eligible studies were extracted, and statistical analysis was performed using Review Manager (RevMan) software (The Cochrane Collaboration, London, United Kingdom). Odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated. After filtering, six studies were included, containing a total of 4,824 patients. Four trials aimed to investigate the objective response rate (ORR), and three trials looked at the duration of response (DOR), all-cause adverse effects (AEs), and treatment-related adverse effects. The ORR was significantly higher in the PD-L1 inhibitor group (OR, 2.68; 95% CI, 2.09-3.44; p < 0.00001). Similarly, treatment with anti-PD-L1 therapy significantly increased the mean DOR (mean difference {MD}, 2.96; 95% CI, 2.74-3.18; p < 0.00001). All-cause adverse events and treatment-related adverse events were both higher in the anti-PD-L1 groups (OR: 1.93, 95% CI: 0.85-3.87, and p = 0.12 and OR: 1.66, 95% CI: 1.00-2.75, and p = 0.05, respectively). However, only treatment-related adverse events were significantly higher. This meta-analysis confirmed that regimens containing PD-1- or PD-L1-targeting agents have clinical utility and acceptable side-effect profiles when used in the treatment of triple-negative breast cancer. Future research should explore combination therapies to enhance efficacy and combat resistance.
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.