ArticleJAMA network open2026
Systemic Glucocorticoid Immunosuppression and Survival Among Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Recipients.
Article in JAMA network open, 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.
- Association of baseline hormone levels with outcomes of first-line immunotherapy in extensive-stage small cell lung cancer.Translational lung cancer research · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
18 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Importance: Systemic glucocorticoid immunosuppression (gsISP) is commonly used among patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy, but the associations of gsISP timing, dose, and duration with overall survival (OS) remain incompletely characterized. Objective: To examine the associations of gsISP timing, dose, and duration with OS among ICI recipients. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study included ICI recipients treated at Massachusetts General Hospital, Brigham and Women's Hospital, and Dana-Farber Cancer Institute (MGBD) from May 31, 2015, through October 11, 2021, and matched ICI recipients from the TriNetX database from April 30, 2010, through October 11, 2021, for independent validation. The TriNetX cohort was matched 2:1 to the MGBD cohort using propensity scores based on patient baseline characteristics and year of ICI initiation. Exposure: gsISP, evaluated according to timing relative to ICI initiation, prednisone-equivalent dose, and duration of exposure. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was OS. Multivariable accelerated failure time models were used to estimate time ratios (TRs) and 95% CIs, with TR values less than 1 indicating shorter survival. Results: This study included 39 258 patients, with 13 086 in the MGBD cohort and 26 172 in the TriNetX cohort. In the MGBD and TriNetX cohorts, 53.6% and 55.4% of patients were men, and 63.6% and 64.2% were younger than 70 years (mean [SD] age, 64.7 [13.0] years and 64.9 [12.6] years), respectively. In the MGBD cohort, patients who received gsISP within 1 year of ICI initiation had worse OS compared with patients not treated with gsISP, with the most pronounced association observed among patients receiving gsISP within 1 month of ICI initiation (TR, 0.49 [95% CI, 0.45-0.54]). Higher doses and longer durations were also associated with shorter OS; dosages greater than 60 mg/d were associated with 37% (95% CI, 25%-52%) shorter OS, and durations longer than 7 days were associated with 33% (95% CI, 12%-49%) shorter OS. These findings were independently validated in the TriNetX cohort. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of ICI recipients, 3 factors were associated with worse OS: gsISP near ICI initiation, higher gsISP dose, and longer gsISP duration, regardless of indication. These findings may provide clinically relevant information to guide gsISP management among ICI recipients.
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.