SynthesisFrontiers in immunology2026
Sex-based heterogeneity in response to first-line immunotherapy plus chemotherapy in advanced esophageal squamous-cell carcinoma: a meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in immunology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Amid acknowledged sex-based disparities in immune system response, the effect of patients' sex on the efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) treatment remains inconsistent across cancers, and even inconclusive in esophageal squamous-cell carcinoma (ESCC). We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the sex-based heterogeneity in response to first-line immunotherapy in advanced ESCC. Methods: PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library and Embase were searched from inception to December 1st, 2025 to retrieve randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the efficacy of first-line immunotherapy plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone for advanced ESCC. The studies reporting sex-stratified outcomes for overall survival (OS) with or without progression-free survival (PFS), were eligible for inclusion. Pooled hazard ratios (HRs) and 95%CI were calculated separately in men and women using a random-effects model, and the heterogeneity between the two estimates was assessed using an interaction test. Results: Nine phase 3 RCTs, reporting on 4591 men (85.6%) and 773 women (14.4%), were included. An OS benefit of immunotherapy was found for both men (HR, 0.70; 95%CI, 0.65-0.75) and women (HR, 0.71; 95%CI, 0.58-0.87) in the overall population and in the PD-L1-positive subgroup (HR for men: 0.66, 95%CI, 0.55-0.80; HR for women: 0.48, 95%CI, 0.30-0.78). Similarly, the PFS benefit was found for both men (HR, 0.59; 95%CI, 0.54-0.63) and women (HR, 0.58; 95%CI, 0.46-0.74) in the overall population. Random-effects meta-analysis demonstrated no statistically significant study-level differences in response to immunotherapy between the sexes in the overall population (OS, I Conclusion: First-line immunotherapy plus chemotherapy can improve OS and PFS in advanced ESCC for both men and women. No evidence was found to support an association of sex with the efficacy of immunotherapy plus chemotherapy.
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.