Trial reportNature communications2026
Ociperlimab and tislelizumab in advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (AdvanTIG-203): a phase II study.
Trial report in Nature communications, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04732494 (A Phase 2, Multicenter, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Study to Compare the Efficacy of Anti-PD-1 Monoclonal Antibody Tislelizumab), which is not on this 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.
A Phase 2, Multicenter, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Study to Compare the Efficacy of Anti-PD-1 Monoclonal Antibody Tislelizumab (BGB-A317) Plus Anti-TIGIT Monoclonal Antibody Ociperlimab (BGB-A1217) Versus Tislelizumab Plus Placebo as Second-Line Treatment in Patients With PD-L1 Tumor Area Positivity (TAP) ≥ 10% Unresectable, Locally Advanced, Recurrent or Metastatic Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma
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
22 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) have an unmet need for new therapies that improve survival. In this phase II trial, patients received ociperlimab and tislelizumab (A) or placebo and tislelizumab (B) (NCT04732494). The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR) assessed by the investigator per RECIST v1.1. A total of 125 patients were randomized to A (N = 62) and B (N = 63). The primary endpoint was not met, with an ORR (95% confidence interval [CI]) assessed by the investigator of 30.6% (19.6-43.7) for A and 20.6% (11.5-32.7) for B (stratified risk difference: 9.9% [95% CI - 5.4 to 25.3]; stratified 2-sided p = 0.2114). At the final analysis, median OS (95% CI) was 10.2 (7.9-19.5) months for A and 9.3 (6.4-14.8) months for B (stratified HR [95% CI]: 0.92 [0.58-1.45]). A total of 25.8% (16/62) and 20.6% (13/63) of patients in A and B, respectively, experienced grade ≥3 treatment-related treatment-emergent adverse events. Exploratory biomarker analyses showed that patients with an inflamed tumor microenvironment, shown by the enriched expression of natural killer (NK) cells, T cells, macrophages, dendritic cells, and B-cell signatures, and NK cell signature enrichment, may benefit from ociperlimab plus tislelizumab. Adding ociperlimab to tislelizumab did not provide significant efficacy improvement in recurrent/metastatic second-line ESCC; the addition of ociperlimab to tislelizumab was generally well-tolerated. Trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT04732494.
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.