SynthesisFrontiers in immunology2026
Adjuvant immunotherapy
Synthesis in Frontiers in immunology, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The role of adjuvant immunotherapy after neoadjuvant therapy and esophagectomy remains uncertain. We examined its association with survival in populations composed predominantly of patients with residual disease across neoadjuvant strategies. Methods: This systematic review included comparative studies of postoperative immunotherapy Results: A total of 13 studies, including two randomized trials and 11 retrospective cohorts, were included. The overall survival (OS) data came from 12 studies with 4,225 patients, while the disease-free or recurrence-free survival (DFS/RFS) data were from 11 studies with 2,363 patients. Postoperative immunotherapy was associated with longer OS [HR = 0.64, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.53-0.77] and DFS/RFS (HR = 0.74, 95%CI = 0.66-0.84). The associations were favorable after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NCRT), chemoimmunotherapy (NCIT), and chemotherapy (NCT). Interaction testing was significant for OS, but not for DFS/RFS. The paradigm estimates were not direct comparisons as the histology, geography, and study design differed across strategies. Sensitivity analyses addressing residual disease eligibility and postoperative treatment composition yielded similar average estimates. Analyses restricted to studies with aligned postoperative time origins remained directionally favorable, but were based on only a few studies. The Bayesian pooled estimates were concordant, although the predictive intervals crossed 1 for both outcomes. Certainty was low. Conclusions: Randomized evidence supports a DFS benefit from adjuvant immunotherapy after NCRT. However, a statistically significant randomized OS benefit has not been demonstrated. The associations after NCIT were favorable, but entirely observational. The favorable estimates after NCT were based on only two small retrospective studies, while mixed neoadjuvant treatment was represented by a single study with imprecise estimates. The esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC)-predominant and residual pathology findings were exploratory. Further randomized studies are needed to define the role of postoperative immunotherapy after NCIT or NCT and to determine whether pathologic features can inform patient selection. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier CRD420261384875.
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.