ArticleTranslational cancer research2026
PD-1-targeted therapeutic strategies for advanced or recurrent gastric and gastroesophageal junction cancer: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
Article in Translational cancer research, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The optimal strategy for integrating programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) blockade into treatment frameworks for patients with unresectable or recurrent advanced gastric and gastroesophageal junction cancers remains unclear. This network meta-analysis compared the therapeutic effectiveness and safety profiles of diverse PD-1-based approaches in this population. Methods: A comprehensive literature search of PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Science was performed up to July 31, 2025, to identify randomized trials assessing overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), and grade 3 or higher treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs). A random-effects network meta-analysis was carried out using a frequentist framework. Survival outcomes were analyzed as hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), and categorical outcomes were summarized as odds ratios (ORs) with corresponding 95% CIs. The relative ranking of each regimen was estimated using the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA). Results: Twenty trials (n=9,928) evaluated PD-1 monotherapy, PD-1 + chemotherapy, PD-1 + anti-angiogenic therapy, PD-1 plus lymphocyte activation gene 3 (LAG-3) plus chemotherapy, chemotherapy alone, placebo + chemotherapy, and placebo. PD-1 + chemotherapy achieved the highest rankings for OS (SUCRA 87.0%; HR Conclusions: PD-1 + chemotherapy offers the greatest survival and tumor-control benefit at the expense of increased toxicity, whereas PD-1 monotherapy provides a safer profile with modest efficacy. These findings support individualization of PD-1-based regimens based on patient fitness and risk tolerance.
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.