ReviewStrahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al]2026
Timing matters: how mechanism-guided sequencing shapes the efficacy of radiotherapy-immunotherapy combinations : A systematic review.
Review in Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al], 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.
- Augmenting interferon-β and anti-PD-L1 antibody bolsters non-ablative radiotherapy to leverage potent abscopal effect in metastatic cancers.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe combination of radiotherapy (RT) and immunotherapy has emerged as a central strategy in modern oncology, yet clinical outcomes remain highly variable. This variability is critically influenced by timing, including sequencing, interval, and temporal alignment with immune dynamics. We performed a systematic review to evaluate how mechanism-guided timing of RT relative to different immunotherapy classes shapes antitumor efficacy.
methodsA systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science for studies published between 2009 and January 2026 evaluating RT-immunotherapy combinations with explicit timing or sequencing analysis. Preclinical and clinical studies reporting immune mechanisms, systemic immune responses, or efficacy outcomes were included. Data were extracted on immunotherapy class, RT regimen, sequencing strategy, and outcomes. Risk of bias was assessed using design-appropriate tools.
resultsA total of 84 studies met inclusion criteria: 56 preclinical and 28 clinical, including four randomized controlled trials. Timing emerged as a critical biological determinant of synergy. Radiotherapy induced a temporally dynamic immune response encompassing immunogenic cell death, innate immune activation, T‑cell priming, and adaptive immune resistance. Optimal sequencing was mechanism-dependent: Cytotoxic T‑lymphocyte-associated protein 4 (CTLA-4) blockade was most effective before or concomitantly with RT; programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1)/programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitors performed best after RT, during peak T‑cell infiltration and checkpoint upregulation; co-stimulatory agonists showed optimal activity shortly after RT; and innate immune activators required immediate post-RT administration. Emerging evidence suggests circadian timing may further modulate efficacy.
conclusionTiming is not a logistical variable but a central biological component of RT-immunotherapy combinations. A mechanism-guided temporal framework substantially influences immune responses and therapeutic outcomes, representing a low-cost, high-impact optimization strategy. Circadian considerations remain compelling but require validation in prospective trials.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42429974What 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.