SynthesisFrontiers in immunology2024
Impact of steroid-sparing immunosuppressive agents on tumor outcome in the context of cancer immunotherapy with highlight on melanoma: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in immunology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Extracorporeal photopheresis versus systemic immunosuppression for treatment of immune-related adverse events: clinical outcomes from the prospective two-arm PRIA study.Journal for immunotherapy of cancer · 2026Observational
- <p>Converting 'cold' to 'hot' hepatocellular carcinoma for improved immunotherapy (Review)</p>.Molecular medicine reports · 2026Review
- Utilization of Steroid Sparing Agents for Immune-Related Adverse Events (irAEs): Management Strategies and Considerations.Current oncology reports · 2026Review
- ChronoimmunoTOX: A Single-Institution Retrospective Study on How the Time of Administration Impacts Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Efficacy and Toxicity in Melanoma.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Unveiling the global research status and intellectual map of cancer and immunosuppressants.Discover oncology · 2025Article
- Evidence for optimal treatment of immune-related adverse events needed - should we use extracorporeal photopheresis?Immunotherapy · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: The impact of steroid-sparing immunosuppressive agents (SSIAs) for immune-related adverse events (irAEs) on tumor outcome is not well-known. This systematic review evaluates tumor outcomes for corticosteroid (CS) monotherapy versus CS with SSIA (CS-SSIA) for irAE treatment with a focus on melanoma. Methods: Search was conducted through 1/5/23 using PubMed, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Web of Science. We included case series, retrospective/prospective observational studies and interventional clinical trials. Individual-level data was analyzed using KM curves and Cox regression for overall survival (OS) and progression free survival (PFS). Time to SSIA was treated as a time-varying exposure using landmark analysis (landmark timepoint=3 months after irAE) to account for immortal time bias. For group-level data, meta-analysis compared the use of SSIA to No SSIA for irAEs. Results: Of twenty-two publications with individual-level data, 147 patients with any cancer (57 CS, 90 CS-SSIA) and 65 with melanoma (18 CS, 47 CS-SSIA) underwent landmark analysis. Twenty-two publications underwent group-level evaluation and four were included in the meta-analysis. CS-SSIA versus CS showed higher risk of all-cause mortality and progression (HR 2.75, 95%CI: 1.44-5.27, p<0.01 and HR 1.75, 95%CI: 1.07-2.85, p=0.03, respectively). Melanoma showed worse OS and PFS for CS-SSIA versus CS (HR 5.68, 95%CI: 1.31-24.67, p=0.02 and HR 2.68, 95%CI: 1.12-6.40, p=0.03, respectively). In the meta-analysis of group-level data (n=2558), we found worse OS and PFS for CS-SSIA versus No SSIA (HR 1.58, 95%CI: 1.25; 2.01, p<0.01 and 1.70, 95%CI: 1.25-2.33, p<0.01). Tumor necrosis factor-alpha inhibitors (TNFi) were the most common SSIA. In the melanoma cohort, TNFi had worse OS and PFS versus CS (HR 6.46, 95%CI: 1.43-29.19, p = 0.02 and HR 7.49, 95%CI: 2.29-24.48, p<0.01, respectively). TNFi versus Other SSIAs showed a trend toward worse OS and worse PFS (HR 6.96, 95%CI: 0.90-53.65, p=0.06 and HR 21.5, 95%CI: 2.63-175.8, p<0.01, respectively). Meta-analysis showed a concern for TNFi compared to Other SSIA (HR 1.56, 95%CI: 1.17-2.09, p<0.01 respectively). Conclusions: While our results raise concern about the effects of CS-SSIA and TNFi for irAE therapy on tumor outcomes, prospective randomized controlled trials are needed to definitively assess the effect of SSIAs on tumor outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.