PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
May 16, 2026Frontiers in Immunology0 citationsOpen Access

Induction immunochemotherapy followed by concurrent chemoradiotherapy improves survival in unresectable esophageal cancer: a systematic review, meta-analysis, and network meta-analysis

XFXuefei FanXLXin LiuSMSong Mi

Key Points

  • This research aims to explore the efficacy of combining immunotherapy with concurrent chemoradiotherapy for unresectable esophageal cancer.
  • Conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of single-arm and controlled trials
  • Analyzed overall survival, progression-free survival, objective response rate, and safety
  • Utilized pairwise and network meta-analysis methods with a total of 9648 participants
  • Induction immunochemotherapy plus CCRT (ICT-CCRT) improved overall survival (OS) with HR 0.52 (95% CI 0.39–0.71)
  • CCRT plus consolidation immunotherapy (CCRT-IO) improved OS in pairwise analyses with HR 0.77 (95% CI 0.65–0.90)
  • CCRT-IO consistently improved progression-free survival (PFS) with HR 0.74 (95% CI 0.64–0.85) across analyses.

Abstract

Background Concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) remains the standard treatment for unresectable esophageal cancer (EC). However, the clinical benefits of combining immunotherapy with CCRT for unresectable EC remain controversial. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the potential benefits of different immunotherapy strategies added to CCRT in patients with unresectable EC. Methods We employed single-arm, pairwise and network meta-analysis (NMA) methods to analyze the overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR) and safety of several combined treatment strategies based on CCRT. Results 30 single-arm trials and 39 controlled trials involving a total of 9648 participants were included. Compared with CCRT alone, both induction immunochemotherapy plus CCRT (ICT-CCRT) and CCRT plus consolidation immunotherapy (CCRT-IO) significantly improved OS in pairwise meta-analyses (HR 0.52, 95% CI 0.39–0.71, I²= 0.0%; HR 0.77, 95% CI 0.65–0.90, I²= 0.0%, respectively). In the NMA, only ICT-CCRT showed a significant OS benefit (HR 0.75, 95% CI 0.64–0.88), whereas CCRT-IO did not. For PFS, CCRT-IO consistently prolonged PFS compared with CCRT alone in both pairwise meta-analyses (HR 0.74, 95% CI 0.64-0.85, I²=0.0%) and NMA (HR 0.78, 95% CI 0.76–0.99). In contrast, ICT-CCRT demonstrated a significant PFS benefit only in the NMA (HR 0.84, 95% CI 0.71–0.99), but not in the pairwise analysis. Notably, ICT-CCRT ranked first in the NMA for both OS and PFS. Conclusions In conclusion, compared with CCRT alone, ICT-CCRT significantly improves OS and shows a potential PFS benefit. CCRT-IO improves OS only in pairwise analyses but consistently improves PFS across analyses. Currently, sufficient randomized controlled trials are lacking to validate the efficacy and determine the optimal timing and sequence. Systematic review registration https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/ , identifier CRD420261364669.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Fan et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a0808ffa487c87a6a40b0b5https://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2026.1767380
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper