SynthesisFrontiers in oncology2026
Clinical efficacy and safety of pembrolizumab and nivolumab in frontline treatment for classical Hodgkin lymphoma: systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical trials.
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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Treatment of classical Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL) underwent substantial advances throughout the last decades, where PD-1 inhibitors showed improved clinical outcomes, leading to their approval for relapsed and refractory disease. Recent studies showed benefit in utilizing these agents in first-line settings. Recent studies showed benefit in utilizing these agents in first-line settings. This meta-analysis investigates clinical efficacy and safety of pembrolizumab and nivolumab for frontline cHL treatment. Methods: A comprehensive literature search was conducted through PubMed, EBSCO Host, and CENTRAL using relevant keywords. Full-text publications in the English language of clinical trials were selected. Complete response rate (CRR), overall response rate (ORR), 2-year overall survival (OS), 2-year progression-free survival (PFS), and grade ≥3 adverse events (AEs) were evaluated for pooled analysis. Results: Nine trials, including 880 patients with previously untreated cHL (21% with early-stage disease) with a median age of 34 years and a median follow-up of 31.2 months, were analyzed. Pooled data in all treatments revealed ORR 86% (95% confidence interval (CI), 59-96%), CRR 57% (95% CI, 62-97%), 2-year PFS 90% (95% CI, 70-97%), and 2-year OS 97% (95% CI, 91%-99%). Forty-one percent of patients (95% CI, 21-64%) experienced grade ≥3 AEs, and 17% (95% CI, 6-38%) grade ≥3 immune-related AEs in all treatment groups. AVD with pembrolizumab or nivolumab showed comparable efficacy (2-year PFS: 97% (95% CI, 88-99%) vs 92% (95% CI, 89-94%), 2-year OS: 98% (95% CI, 88%-100%) vs 99% (95% CI, 99-100%) and safety (grade ≥3 AEs: 36% vs 33%), respectively. Nivolumab with brentuximab vedotin had worse outcomes (2-year PFS 80%, OS 87%, and grade ≥3 AEs 79%), likely due to an older study population (median age 71.5 years). Conclusions: Adoption of nivolumab or pembrolizumab combinations in frontline treatment for cHL is a valid strategy for advanced disease or patients who are unfit or not interested in intensive cytotoxic chemotherapy regimens.
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.