Loading
Life sciences · Review
Stemedicine · November 5, 2026
No summary has been generated for this record yet. What follows is drawn from its source metadata only.
Review.
No findings were extractable from the material analysed.
Safety was not reported in the material analysed. Check the source before drawing any conclusion about harm.
The source did not state who this applies to in practice.
Graded across the dimensions that decide whether you should act, each from what the source actually supports. There is no single score, and where a dimension was not assessed it says so.
This record has not been graded across any dimension yet. Treat the label above as provisional and read the source.
What is missing. This record has no bottom line, key findings, reported figures, evidence dimensions. That is a gap in the analysis, not a judgement about the study.
Background: This review assessed whether reduced-exposure anti-PD-1 therapy (a dose below label, or an interval beyond label) is non-inferior to label dosing for overall survival in advanced cancer, and compared progression-free survival, objective response and severe immune-related toxicity. Methods: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised and cohort studies, reported according to PRISMA 2020. Hazard ratios (HRs) and risk ratios (RRs) were pooled with restricted maximum-likelihood random-effects models and the Hartung–Knapp–Sidik–Jonkman adjustment. Risk of bias was assessed with RoB 2 and ROBINS-I, and certainty with GRADE. Non-inferiority was judged against a prespecified HR margin of 1.20. Results: Ten studies met the inclusion criteria; nine entered the primary analyses (one randomised trial at interim analysis, eight cohorts). For overall survival (7 studies, 2,932 patients), the pooled HR for reduced versus label dosing was 0.96 (95% CI 0.75–1.23; I² 0%), and 0.96 (0.73–1.25) after excluding the one cohort at critical risk of immortal-time bias. The upper bound exceeded the margin, and omitting the largest registry moved the HR to 1.07 (0.81–1.42). For progression-free survival the HR was 0.99 (0.63–1.56; 5 studies) with that cohort and 0.94 (0.56–1.58) without it. Objective response did not differ (RR 0.89, 0.44–1.78). Grade ≥3 immune-related adverse events were less frequent with reduced dosing (RR 0.61, 0.24–1.58; 3 studies), significantly so only under a common-effect model. Certainty was low for overall survival and very low for the other outcomes. Conclusion: Pembrolizumab doses 25–50% below label in non-small cell lung cancer were not associated with worse survival, but non-inferiority is not established and comparative data on ultra-low nivolumab doses are almost absent. Recommendation: Fully published randomised non-inferiority trials and prospective head-to-head studies of ultra-low doses in low- and middle-income countries are needed before reduced dosing becomes standard. Future studies should report outcomes by actual mg/kg exposure