ReviewCurrent oncology (Toronto, Ont.)2026
Prescribing Biologic Immune-Modifying Therapies for Patients with a History of Cancer: A Cross-Specialty Review.
Review in Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.), 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The rapid expansion of biologic therapies for immune-mediated inflammatory diseases has raised significant clinical concerns regarding malignancy risk, particularly for patients with a history of cancer. This narrative review explores the safety of targeted therapies across dermatology, rheumatology, respiratory medicine, and gastroenterology to guide clinicians in these therapeutic dilemmas. We conducted a non-systematic review of the literature, prioritising longitudinal registry and real-world cohort data over clinical trials to better capture malignancy outcomes with long latency periods. Results indicate that tumour necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors, which have the most extensive evidence base, do not consistently demonstrate an increased risk of overall incident malignancy or recurrence across specialties. Newer agents, including interleukin (IL)-17 and IL-23 inhibitors, show reassuring safety profiles in both trial and registry data. While dupilumab is associated with the potential diagnostic 'unmasking' of pre-existing cutaneous T-cell lymphoma, overall cancer rates remain stable among users. Most clinical guidelines support an individualised, multidisciplinary approach involving oncology consultation. We conclude that biologic agents can be used cautiously in certain patients with a history of malignancy following multidisciplinary discussion; however, in those with active malignancy there are no meaningful data that exist. Most evidence is heterogenous and excludes patients with a history of malignancy. Future management requires validated decision frameworks and mandatory participation in real-world patient co-created registries which leverage developing artificial intelligence tools to refine long-term safety assessments.
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.