ArticleDiscover oncology2026
Comparing immunotherapy re-challenge plus chemoradiotherapy versus chemoradiotherapy alone in metastatic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma after first-line immunotherapy failure.
Article in Discover oncology, 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.
- Radiotherapy for overcoming immune checkpoint inhibitor resistance in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundImmunotherapy (IO) re-challenge for cancer patients has sparked widespread discussion and attention in recent years. The optimal second-line treatment strategies for patients with metastatic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) after first-line IO failure remains to be further explored. This study aimed to compare the real-world safety and efficacy of IO re-challenge combined with chemoradiotherapy (CRT) versus CRT alone in metastatic ESCC patients.
methodsWe conducted a real-world retrospective study on 59 patients with ESCC who received second-line therapy after first-line IO failure at the Cancer Center of Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University from September 2019 to December 2023. Patients were divided into the IO plus CRT group (n = 34) and CRT alone group (n = 25). Clinical efficacy and adverse events (AEs) were analyzed and compared. Primary outcomes included median overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR) and safety. Subgroup analysis was also performed.
resultsCompared with the CRT alone, IO re-challenge combined with CRT showed significantly improved median OS (11.4 months vs. 6.2 months; adjusted HR = 0.48; 95% CI: 0.25-0.90; P = 0.022), PFS (6.8 months vs. 3.9 months; adjusted HR = 0.50; 95% CI: 0.27-0.94; P = 0.031), and higher ORR (35.3% vs. 16.0%) and DCR (88.2% vs. 68.0%). Patients with the following characteristics: male, stage III-IV, primary tumor located in the middle esophagus, with regional lymph node metastasis and/or distant metastasis, and first-line PFS > 6 months were more likely to obtain OS benefit from IO re-challenge combined with CRT. The incidence of grade ≥ 3 AEs in the two groups of patients were 44.1% and 40.0%, respectively, and mainly including leukopenia, neutropenia, anemia, thrombocytopenia, fatigue and loss of appetite.
conclusionsSecond-line IO re-challenge combined with CRT provided significant survival benefits and controllable safety compared with CRT alone for ESCC patients who had disease progression after first-line IO failure. Further prospective study is needed.
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.