SynthesisFrontiers in oncology2026
Evaluating the efficacy and safety of first-line immunotherapy for metastatic triple-negative breast cancer: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials with a focus on PD-L1 expression.
Synthesis in Frontiers in oncology, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: This study systematically reviewed randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and conducted a Bayesian network meta-analysis to evaluate first-line immunotherapy regimens for metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (mTNBC), aiming to compare the efficacy and safety of different immunotherapy combinations and to explore the impact of programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression levels on survival benefits in patients. Methods: A comprehensive literature search was conducted across PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases. Outcomes included overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), and the incidence of grade ≥3 adverse events (AE≥3). A Bayesian network meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of different immunotherapy regimens in the overall population and various PD-L1 expression subgroups (≥1%, ≥10%, and <1%). This study has been registered on PROSPERO (ID: CRD420251138714). Results: A total of 8 RCTs involving 3,789 patients and 6 immunotherapy combination regimens were included. Compared with chemotherapy alone, the combination of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) with chemotherapy significantly improved OS (HR = 0.90, 95% CI: 0.82-0.98) and PFS (HR = 0.82, 95% CI: 0.75-0.89) in the overall mTNBC population. The AE≥3 was slightly higher (OR = 1.20, 95% CI: 0.94-1.53) without statistical significance. In patients with PD-L1 expression ≥1%, ICIs combined with chemotherapy significantly improved OS (HR = 0.83, 95% CI: 0.74-0.93) and PFS (HR = 0.74, 95% CI: 0.66-0.82). In patients with PD-L1 ≥10%, the benefits for OS (HR = 0.68, 95% CI: 0.53-0.87) and PFS (HR = 0.68, 95% CI: 0.52-0.91) were even more pronounced. Toripalimab combined with chemotherapy (Toripa-chemo) showed the greatest OS benefit in the overall population (HR = 0.58, 95% CI: 0.38-0.87). Atezolizumab combined with Entinostat and chemotherapy (Atezo-Entino-chemo) showed a trend toward improved OS (HR = 0.49, 95% CI: 0.22-1.12) and ORR (OR = 5.14, 95% CI: 0.70-37.94). Pembrolizumab combined with chemotherapy (Pembro-chemo) demonstrated the best safety profile (OR = 1.06, 95% CI: 0.52-2.16). Subgroup analysis showed that in patients with PD-L1 ≥ 1%, Toripa-chemo conferred the greatest benefit, with the most favorable OS (HR = 0.67, 95% CI: 0.40-1.12) and PFS (HR = 0.64, 95% CI: 0.47-0.87). Conversely, in patients with PD-L1 <1%, Pembro-chemo showed the best OS benefit (HR = 0.97, 95% CI: 0.72-1.31). Conclusions: Compared to chemotherapy alone, immunotherapy combined with chemotherapy significantly improves survival outcomes in mTNBC patients, with more pronounced benefits observed in the PD-L1 positive population. Toripa-chemo and Pembro-chemo demonstrate a balanced profile of efficacy and safety, suggesting that they may be suitable options for first-line treatment of mTNBC. Among these, Toripa-chemo may be considered a preferred first-line regimen for PD-L1 positive patients. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier ID: CRD420251138714.
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.