ArticleBMC cancer2026
Neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy vs. neoadjuvant targeted therapy plus chemotherapy for EGFR-mutated non-small cell lung cancer: a retrospective study.
Article in BMC cancer, 2026. 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAdjuvant targeted therapy represents the standard of care for patients with resectable epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-mutated non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Neoadjuvant therapy can improve surgical and survival outcomes. This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy (NICT) and neoadjuvant targeted therapy plus chemotherapy (NTCT) for EGFR-mutated NSCLCs.
methodsIn this multi-center retrospective study, we reviewed patients with EGFR-mutated NSCLC who underwent surgery following NICT or NTCT. The primary end point was major pathologic response (MPR), and the secondary end points included pathologic complete response (pCR) and 1-year disease-free survival (DFS).
resultsThis study included 89 patients (53 females, 36 males) with a median age of 57 (Interquartile range [IQR], 51–57) years. Of these, there were 44 and 45 patients undergoing surgery following NICT and NTCT respectively. Patients who received NICT had a more advanced clinical T stage (p = 0.018), a higher frequency of harboring EGFR exon 20 insertion (P = 0.035) and a shorter length of hospital stay (p = 0.005), compared with those who received NTCT. The MPR rate was 29.5% (95% confidence interval [CI], 16.8–45.2) in the NICT group, compared with 15.6% (95%CI, 6.5–29.5) in the NTCT group (p = 0.185). The 1-year DFS rates were 0.872 (95%CI, 0.762–0.998) in the NICT group and 0.721 (95%CI, 0.586–0.887) in the NTCT group (p = 0.18).
conclusionsNICT seemed to be an effective treatment for patients with EGFR-mutated NSCLC, further randomized controlled trials are in need to validate the safety and efficacy of NICT in this setting.
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.