ArticleESMO open2026
Pseudoprogression in neoadjuvant immunotherapy for resectable NSCLC: a PET-CT-based study.
Article in ESMO open, 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNeoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy is standard for resectable non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) but response assessment is challenging due to pseudoprogression, which may lead to unnecessary cancellation of surgery. We characterized pseudoprogression and developed a clinical strategy to distinguish it from true progression after neoadjuvant immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy. PATIENTS AND
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed data from 283 patients with resectable NSCLC receiving neoadjuvant ICI (n = 235) or tyrosine kinase inhibitor (n = 48) therapy from January 2021 to December 2023. Positron emission tomography-computed tomography (PET-CT) scans were acquired at baseline and preoperatively. Responses were evaluated using RECIST 1.1 and European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) criteria. Predictors of pseudoprogression were evaluated using multivariable logistic regression. Model performance was assessed in an independent validation cohort (n = 95).
resultsBy RECIST 1.1, 26 of 283 patients (9.2%) had progressive disease (PD), all in the ICI cohort. By EORTC criteria, the number with PD increased to 71 of 283 (25.1%). Despite PD, all 26 patients underwent R0 resection; complete pathological response (CPR) and major pathological response (MPR) rates were 53.8% and 65.3% compared with 30.0% and 49.0%, respectively, in patients without PD. Among 71 with progressive metabolic disease, 69 (97.2%) achieved R0; CPR and MPR were 38.0% and 54.9%, respectively. Primary-tumor progression had lower MPR than nodal or distant progression (23.1%, 58.2%, and 73.3%, respectively, P = 0.020). Pseudoprogression occurred in 7.2% based on CT, increasing to 16.2% with PET-CT. A ≥53.1% reduction in primary-tumor maximum standardized update value (SUV
conclusionsImaging-defined progression after neoadjuvant ICI may reflect pseudoprogression, most commonly nodal or distant lesions without primary tumor progression. A validated model incorporating primary-tumor metabolic response and clinical features improves discrimination of pseudoprogression and may support decision making to avoid inappropriate cancellation of potentially curative resection.
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.