ArticleThoracic cancer2025
Comparative Efficacy of PD-1 Inhibitor-Based Neoadjuvant Chemoimmunotherapy Regimens for Resectable Stage II-IIIa NSCLC: A Real-World Retrospective Study.
Article in Thoracic cancer, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAlthough neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy has emerged as a promising approach for resectable non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), comparative real-world data on different PD-1 inhibitors are limited. This study compared the clinical efficacy, pathological response, survival, and safety of four PD-1 inhibitors-pembrolizumab, tislelizumab, camrelizumab, and sintilimab-in patients with Stage II-IIIa NSCLC.
methodsWe retrospectively reviewed 199 patients with resectable Stage II-IIIa NSCLC treated with neoadjuvant PD-1 inhibitors plus platinum-based chemotherapy from January 2018 to December 2024. After excluding 50 non-surgical cases, 149 patients were included. Outcomes compared included pathological response (pathological complete response, pCR; major pathological response, MPR), recurrence, disease-free survival (DFS), overall survival (OS), and adverse events.
resultspCR and MPR rates were 52.2% and 58.0% (pembrolizumab), 67.6% and 75.7% (tislelizumab), 71.4% and 71.4% (camrelizumab), and 47.2% and 61.1% (sintilimab), respectively. Differences in pCR/MPR were not statistically significant. However, OS differed significantly across groups (p < 0.05), favoring pembrolizumab and tislelizumab. No significant differences were observed in progression-free survival (PFS) or recurrence among patients with pCR. Grade ≥ 3 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 27.0%-42.9% of patients, lowest in the tislelizumab group.
conclusionAll treatment regimens elicited substantial pathological responses and exhibited acceptable safety profiles. Pembrolizumab and tislelizumab were associated with better OS and lower toxicity, supporting their preferential use in neoadjuvant therapy for resectable NSCLC.
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.