Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42388498›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in medicine2026

Clinical outcomes of tebentafusp in metastatic uveal melanoma: a systematic review and single-arm meta-analysis.

Han Cai, Zhilong Huang, Bing-Long Wang, Ming Wei, Miao Tian, Hongmei Zheng

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Han CaiOphthalmology Center, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, Hubei, China.
Zhilong HuangGuangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
Bing-Long WangSchool of Health Policy and Management, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Ming WeiOphthalmology Center, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, Hubei, China.
Miao TianOphthalmology Center, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, Hubei, China.
Hongmei ZhengOphthalmology Center, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, Hubei, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate efficacy and safety of tebentafusp in patients with metastatic uveal melanoma. Method: A systematic search was conducted in five databases (Pubmed, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library) to find articles that evaluate the effectiveness of tebentafusp in patients with metastatic uveal melanoma, from the establishment of the databases to October 13, 2025. Additionally, clinical trials were searched on clinicaltrials.gov. Meta-analyses were performed to evaluate the frequencies of progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), partial response (PR), stable disease (SD), progressive disease (PD), objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), Cytokine release syndrome (CRS) and treatment-related adverse events (trAEs). Results: A total of six studies were initially enrolled, involving 850 participants. Among them, 631 patients with evaluable uveal melanoma who received tebentafusp treatment were ultimately included in this meta-analysis (mean age, 60.56 years; 425 [50%] men). The median OS and PFS were 21.3 months and 3.6 months, respectively. The PR, SD, PD,ORR and DCR were 0.09 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.05 to 0.14], 0.39 (95% CI, 0.35 to 0.43), 0.79 (95% CI, 0.32 to 0.97), 0.09 (95% CI, 0.06 to 0.13) and 0.27 (95% CI, 0.20 to 0.36), respectively. The any grade cytokine release syndrome rate, grade ≥ 3 cytokine release syndrome rate, any grade trAEs rate and grade ≥ 3 trAEs rate were 0.88 (95% CI, 0.84 to 0.91), 0.02 (95% CI, 0.01 to 0.06), 0.98 (95% CI, 0.75 to 1.00) and 0.41 (95% CI, 0.17 to 0.71), respectively. The most common adverse reactions include pyrexia 0.83 (95% CI, 0.79 to 0.86), nausea 0.58 (95% CI, 0.42 to 0.73), fatigue 0.54 (95% CI, 0.38 to 0.70), pruritus 0.72 (95% CI, 0.65 to 0.78), chills 0.60 (95% CI, 0.47 to 0.71), dry skin 0.43 (95% CI, 0.25 to 0.63), hypotension 0.41 (95% CI, 0.36 to 0.45). Conclusion: The research results show that tebentafusp exhibits modest but potentially meaningful survival benefit despite low response rates for metastatic uveal melanoma patients. Although adverse events often occur, such as cytokine release syndrome of grade three or above, they are usually manageable and controllable. Given the limitations of this study, it is crucial to conduct further multi-center randomized controlled trials and increase the sample size to further verify our results. Systematic review registration: PROSPERO: CRD420251234508. Available from https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD420251234508.

Indexed as

meta-analysismetastatic uveal melanomatebentafusptrialstumor - classifications & detections

Identifiers

PMID42388498
PMCPMC13318776

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.