ReviewOncoTargets and therapy2026
Clinical Efficacy and Safety of Pembrolizumab-Based Therapy in Recurrent or Advanced Cervical Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in OncoTargets and therapy, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: This study aimed to evaluate the therapeutic efficacy and safety profile of pembrolizumab in patients with recurrent and advanced cervical cancer. Methods: A systematic literature search was conducted in six databases, including Web of Science, PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar, from database inception to March 2026. Studies evaluating pembrolizumab monotherapy or pembrolizumab-containing combination therapy in patients with recurrent or advanced cervical cancer were included. Pooled analyses were performed to estimate survival outcomes, tumor response rates, and adverse events using fixed-effects or random-effects models according to the degree of heterogeneity. Subgroup analyses were conducted according to study design and treatment strategy. Results: Eleven studies involving 1`111 patients with recurrent or advanced cervical cancer were included in the meta-analysis. Pooled median overall survival (mOS) was 10.82 months (95% CI:8.89-12.76), and the pooled median progression-free survival (mPFS) was 3.47 months (95% CI:2.61-4.34). The pooled overall response rate was 0.30 (95% CI:0.16-0.49), while pooled disease control rate was 0.57 (95% CI:0.36-0.76). Subgroup analyses showed that combination therapy significantly improved the mPFS and tumor response outcomes compared to monotherapy. Clinical trials have demonstrated higher response rates than retrospective studies. Pooled survival outcomes improved in PD-L1-positive patients. Regarding safety, the most common any-grade adverse events included anemia, fatigue, diarrhea, nausea, and vomiting, whereas grade 3-5 adverse events occurred at relatively low frequencies. Conclusion: Pembrolizumab demonstrated promising efficacy and a manageable safety profile in patients with recurrent or advanced cervical cancer. Combination therapy appears to provide superior clinical benefits compared with monotherapy. Further large-scale prospective studies are warranted to confirm these findings and better identify patient subgroups that may derive the greatest benefit from pembrolizumab-based therapy.
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.