SynthesisBMC cancer2026
Evaluating the efficacy and safety of antibody-drug conjugates in non-small cell lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC cancer, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Efficacy and safety of antibody-drug conjugates in EGFR-mutant non-small cell lung cancer after tyrosine kinase inhibitor resistance: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Pooled it
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundNumerous Antibody–Drug Conjugates (ADCs) have been investigated for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), yielding mixed results. This study comprehensively evaluated the efficacy and safety of ADC therapies in NSCLC patients, particularly focusing on specific populations.
methodsA literatures search was conducted to identify prospective trials published between January 2000 and June 2025. Only randomized and non-randomized phase II-IV clinical trials involving adult NSCLC patients treated with ADCs were selected. Efficacy endpoints were categorized based on the primary outcomes of the included studies.
resultsThe analysis included 16 studies with 1872 participants. The pooled analysis showed a Objective Response Rate (ORR) was 34% (95% CI: 26%-42%) with high heterogeneity (I2 = 91.7%). Subgroup analyses revealed significant variations in ORR between different ADC agents (P < 0.0001). In specific NSCLC subgroups, the ORR was 35% for Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor (EGFR)-mutant patients and 36% for those with actionable genomic alterations (AGAs). Notably, HER2-mutant patients achieved a significantly higher ORR of 55%, compared to 21% in populations lacking these mutations (P < 0.0001). ADC therapy may have limited efficacy against squamous cell carcinoma. All-grade and grade ≥ 3 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) occurred in 95% and 43% of patients, respectively, both showing high heterogeneity. The incidence of all-grade interstitial lung disease (ILD) was 10%, with the grade ≥ 3 incidence being 2%. The gastrointestinal system was the most frequently involved, but these were predominantly low-grade. In contrast, hematologic and respiratory system involvement were more common among grade ≥ 3 AEs. Pneumonitis and ILD were the leading causes of both treatment-related mortality and discontinuation.
conclusionADC monotherapy has demonstrated considerable efficacy in previously treated NSCLC. Patients with non-squamous histology, EGFR mutations, or HER2 mutations may derive greater benefit from ADC therapy. However, it should be noted that the partially pooled results, derived from highly heterogeneous data, require cautious interpretation. Close monitoring and proactive management of hematologic and respiratory system-related toxicities are essential. PROSPERO REGISTRATION: CRD420251101467
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.