ArticleBMC cancer2026
The dual role of baseline absolute eosinophil count in non-small cell lung cancer immunotherapy: a biomarker for enhanced efficacy and elevated risk of immune checkpoint inhibitor-related pneumonitis.
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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis retrospective study aimed to evaluate the association between baseline absolute eosinophil count (AEC) and both survival outcomes and the risk of immune checkpoint inhibitor-related pneumonitis (ICI-pneumonitis) in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) receiving immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI)-based therapy.
methodsWe retrospectively enrolled 158 patients with advanced or recurrent NSCLC who received ICI-based therapy at our center. Patients were dichotomized into high- (≥ 120 cells/µL) and low- (< 120 cells/µL) baseline AEC groups. Baseline clinical characteristics, treatment regimens, and immune-related adverse events (irAEs) were collected. Associations between baseline AEC and progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were analyzed using Kaplan–Meier curves and multivariable Cox proportional hazards models. Chi-squared tests were used to compare response rates and irAE incidence between groups. A Fine-Gray competing-risk regression model was applied to identify predictors of ICI-pneumonitis, accounting for death or progression as competing events.
resultsPatients with high baseline AEC showed significantly improved median PFS (mPFS, 24.3 vs. 12.4 months, p < 0.001) and median OS (mOS, not reached vs. 48.3 months, p = 0.008), together with a higher objective response rate (ORR, 59.1% vs. 40.0%, p = 0.018). Multivariable Cox models confirmed high baseline AEC as an independent favorable prognostic factor for both PFS (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.402, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.265–0.609; p < 0.001) and OS (HR: 0.483, 95% CI: 0.256–0.912; p = 0.025). The high-AEC group experienced a higher incidence of any irAEs (39.8% vs. 23.1%, p = 0.028) and ICI-pneumonitis (17.2% vs. 4.6%, p = 0.017). In the Fine-Gray competing-risk model, high baseline AEC remained independently associated with a higher cumulative incidence of pneumonitis (sHR: 4.33, 95% CI: 1.33–14.02; p = 0.015).
conclusionOur findings suggest that baseline AEC may serve as a dual biomarker in NSCLC immunotherapy, demonstrating associations with both improved survival outcomes and an elevated risk of ICI-pneumonitis. These results highlight the need for vigilant monitoring in patients with high baseline AEC. Incorporating this readily available parameter into clinical assessment could help refine risk–benefit stratification for patients considering ICI-based therapy.
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.