ArticleFrontiers in oncology2026
Meta-analysis of tuberculosis incidence and risk in cancer patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To systematically evaluate the incidence of tuberculosis (TB) in cancer patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) and compare the risk of TB between ICI-treated and non-ICI-treated cancer patients, so as to provide evidence-based support for TB prevention and control in cancer patients undergoing ICI therapy. Methods: We searched the English databases including PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library from their inception to April 2025 for cohort studies or case-control studies that reported TB occurrence in cancer patients after ICI treatment or compared TB risk between ICI-treated and non-ICI-treated groups. Two independent researchers conducted literature screening, data extraction, and quality assessment using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) or Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. Meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.4 and Stata 16.0 software. The pooled incidence of TB with 95% confidence interval (95%CI) in ICI-treated cancer patients was calculated; the relative risk (RR) with 95%CI was pooled to compare TB risk between the ICI and non-ICI groups. Funnel plots and Egger's test were used to assess publication bias. Results: A total of 10 studies were included, involving 10,196 cancer patients in the ICI group and 147,528 cancer patients in the non-ICI group. Meta-analysis results showed that: ① The pooled incidence of TB in cancer patients after ICI treatment was 0.63% (95%CI: 0.47%, 0.80%); ② There was no significant difference in TB risk between the ICI group and the non-ICI group (pooled RR = 3.16, 95%CI: 0.44, 22.64, P = 0.138), with substantial heterogeneity (I²=97.1%, P<0.001). Subsequent subgroup analysis revealed that a history of TB was a critical effect modifier, with TB risk significantly elevated in the ICI group only among studies that included patients with prior TB (RR = 7.32, 95%CI:1.19, 45.12). Conclusion: Current evidence indicates that in the overall cancer population, ICI treatment was not associated with a significantly increased risk of TB compared to non-ICI regimens. Importantly, patients with a history of prior TB were found to be at significantly higher risk. This highlights the critical need for enhanced TB screening and vigilant monitoring, especially in this vulnerable subgroup, to mitigate TB-related adverse outcomes.
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.