SynthesisFrontiers in oncology2026
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors: efficacy, safety, and biomarkers - a systematic review.
Synthesis in Frontiers in oncology, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Programmed death-1 (PD-1)/programmed death ligand-1 (PD-L1) inhibitors and cytotoxic Lymphocyte-associated protein 4 (CTLA-4) inhibitors are the core classes of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) widely used in cancer treatment. These agents, including PD-1, PD-L1, and CTLA4 inhibitors, have demonstrated efficacy across multiple cancer types, enhancing progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). However, their use is associated with immune related adverse events (irAEs) that can manifest as skin rashes, hepatitis, diarrhea, colitis, hypopituitarism, and pneumonitis, among other conditions. In this systematic review, we discuss the safety and efficacy of ICIs based on 15 randomized controlled trials and cohort studies that met our eligibility criteria. All selected studies focused on analysing primary clinical outcomes including OS, PFS, objective response rate (ORR), and irAEs. These findings demonstrate that ICIs offer durable antitumor activity with favourable outcomes observed in patients with high tumour mutational burden (TMB) and PD-L1 expression. However, toxicity remains a significant concern, as some reports show substantial adverse events requiring immunosuppressive management. While PD-L1 expression and TMB are established biomarkers for predicting ICI response, their role in predicting immune-related adverse events remains investigational and is not supported by robust evidence. This review further examines combination strategies, including dual checkpoint blockade and ICI combined with chemotherapy, which have demonstrated superior clinical outcomes compared with monotherapy but are associated with increased toxicity. Future research should focus on refining patient selection criteria, optimizing toxicity management protocols, and identifying novel predictive biomarkers for ICI therapy. Understanding these aspects will facilitate the development of more effective ICI-based treatments with improved benefit-to-risk ratios, ultimately enhancing patient outcomes in oncology.
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.