ReviewNature reviews. Clinical oncology2026
Reconsidering adjuvant and perioperative immune-checkpoint inhibition: de-escalation, expansion and personalization.
Review in Nature reviews. Clinical oncology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Overall and Cause-Specific Late Mortality in Long-Term Survivors of Early Onset Solid Cancer After Surgery: A Population-Based Retrospective Cohort Study.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Article
- Review
- Explainable AI reveals squamous histology and U-shaped PD-L1 patterns as primary subgroup predictors of neoadjuvant and perioperative immunotherapy benefit in NSCLC: a machine learning analysis.Cancer immunology, immunotherapy : CII · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Anti-PD-L1 antibodies have transformed cancer treatment and are increasingly being used in patients with early-stage malignancies including in the adjuvant and neoadjuvant settings. In certain cancers, earlier administration of these agents reduces the risk of metastatic disease and might improve overall survival. Thus far, however, overall survival benefits in the adjuvant setting have yet to be clearly demonstrated in all tumour types probably owing to a lack of long-term follow-up and/or the confounding effects of anti-PD-L1 antibody monotherapy and/or combinations in the metastatic setting, in which these agents can also produce durable responses. In this Review, we explore the optimal use of anti-PD-L1 antibodies in the adjuvant and perioperative settings, using examples from melanoma, renal cell carcinoma and non-small-cell lung cancer. We examine de-escalation strategies, including shortening treatment duration or deferring therapy to time of recurrence, at which point anti-PD-L1 antibodies might be more likely to be administered in combination; the expansion of certain specific indications, potentially leading to more effective combinations and/or use in biomarker-defined patients with high-risk early-stage disease; and selecting the most appropriate indication, with emerging data suggesting that neoadjuvant or perioperative use of anti-PD-L1 antibodies might be more effective than adjuvant use in certain cancers, as well as the possibility of personalization of therapy guided by biomarkers such as circulating tumour DNA or other emerging assays.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41708831What 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.