ArticleCancer medicine2026
Rechallenge With Immunotherapy for ES-SCLC: Efficacy and Safety From a Retrospective Propensity Score-Matched Study.
Article in Cancer medicine, 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAlthough immunotherapy combined with platinum-based chemotherapy is now the standard first-line treatment for extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC), the benefit of continuing immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) after disease progression (PD) remains uncertain. This real-world study assessed the efficacy and safety of second-line immunotherapy in ES-SCLC patients using propensity score matching (PSM).
methodsES-SCLC patients who received second-line treatments following first-line chemoimmunotherapy at Zhejiang Cancer Hospital from January 2019 to December 2023 were included. Clinical baseline characteristics were collected and balanced. The efficacy and safety of patients who continued to receive second-line immunotherapy were compared with those who did not.
resultsA total of 187 patients were analyzed. The median overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) for the entire cohort were 8.5 months (95% CI: 7.1-9.9) and 3.3 months (95% CI: 2.5-4.1), respectively. After PSM, each group included 76 patients. No significant differences in OS (median OS: 8.3 vs. 7.8 months; HR, 0.97; 95% CI: 0.68-1.39; p = 0.87) or PFS (median PFS: 3.45 vs. 3.1 months; HR, 1.07; 95% CI: 0.77-1.49; p = 0.69) were observed between the rechallenge and non-rechallenge groups. Subgroup analysis suggested in an exploratory manner that immunotherapy rechallenge was associated with poorer outcomes in non-smokers (mOS: 8 vs. 16.6 months; HR, 2.9; 95% CI: 1.1-7.9; p = 0.004). The rate of all-grade immune-related adverse events (irAEs) was higher in the rechallenge group (36.8% vs. 17.1%).
conclusionRechallenge with immunotherapy after first-line chemoimmunotherapy may not demonstrate a significant survival benefit in ES-SCLC patients, particularly among never smokers, and may lead to more frequent irAEs.
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.