MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Racial disparities in the immunotherapeutic outcomes of patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC): An in-depth systematic review and meta-analysis.

2024· article· en· W4399127422 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Chalothorn Wannaphut, Sakditad Saowapa, Natchaya Polpichai, Phuuwadith Wattanachayakul, Pakin Lalitnithi, Manasawee Tanariyakul, Pharit Siladech

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCervical Cancer and HPV Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineLung cancerMeta-analysisOncologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

1579 Background: The utilization of immunotherapy has become prevalent in the therapeutic approach to non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), owing to its association with enhanced survival outcomes. Nevertheless, a notable gap exists in the available information regarding potential variations in the survival benefits of immunotherapy based on the racial demographics of NSCLC patients. Methods: A systematic search for articles published until January 2023 was performed on PubMed, EMBASE, and Google Scholar databases. Articles that aligned with the research objective were included, while non-English articles, case reports, conference abstracts, studies combining immunotherapy with other cancer therapies, and studies on small-cell lung cancer were excluded. Data required for review and analysis was independently abstracted into separate Excel files by two reviewers. Furthermore, Statistical analyses were performed using the Review Manager software, and the methodological quality evaluation was done using the Newcastle Ottawa Scale. Results: Seven cohort studies were used for review and analysis. A subgroup analysis of data from these studies showed that Black/African American and Asian NSCLC patients receiving immunotherapy had improved overall survival (OS) than White patients (HR: 0.84; 95% CI: 0.75 – 0.95; p = 0.006 and HR: 0.53; 95% CI: 0.30 – 0.93; p = 0.03, respectively). However, the difference in OS is statistically insignificant when Hispanic patients are compared with white patients (HR: 0.68; 95% CI: 0.46 – 1.00; p = 0.05). On the other hand, the subgroup analyses did not demonstrate any significant difference in progression-free survival (PFS) when comparing Black/African American, Asian or Hispanic patients to White patients (HR: 0.93; 95% CI: 0.79 – 1.09; p = 0.35, HR: 0.89; 95% CI: 0.51 – 1.55; p = 0.69, and HR: 1.01; 95% CI: 0.82 – 1.23; p = 0.96, respectively). Conclusions: Among non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients undergoing immunotherapeutic interventions, it is discerned that Black/African American and Asian individuals exhibit superior overall survival (OS) outcomes compared to their White counterparts. However, it is noteworthy that the observed racial disparity does not appear to exert a discernible influence on the progression-free survival (PFS) of NSCLC patients subjected to immunotherapy.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.032
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.071

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.032
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0130.029
Bibliometrics0.0060.008
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.157
GPT teacher head0.509
Teacher spread0.352 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicCervical Cancer and HPV Research→French-language works237,207→