Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Immunotherapy in non-small-cell lung cancer: new data support its use, but some challenges remain
  1. Allan Ramos-Esquivel1,2
  1. 1 Departamento de Farmacologia. Escuela de Medicina, Universidad de Costa Rica, San José, Costa Rica
  2. 2 Servicio de Oncología Médica, Hospital San Juan de Dios. Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social, San José, Costa Rica
  1. Correspondence to Dr. Allan Ramos-Esquivel, Departamento de Farmacología, Escuela de Medicina. Universidad de Costa Rica, San Jose, San José, Costa Rica; allan.ramos{at}

Statistics from

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Over the last decade, immune checkpoints inhibitors (ICIs) have changed the landscape of treatment for patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in the absence of actionable molecular biomarkers. Although the current evidence from phase III randomised clinical trials (RCTs) supports the use of ICIs as first-line and second-line therapy,1 some questions remained about their use in daily clinical practice, specifically if the outcomes reported in RCTs are reproducible with ‘real-world’ data from observational studies. The systematic review and meta-analysis by Kanabar et al published in Thorax,2 summarises current evidence from RCTs and cohort studies regarding the impact of ICIs on progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), adverse events and quality of life. Although the results of this study can appear obvious to the reader—given the consistent benefit of ICIs in this clinical settin—a deeper vision into such findings deserves …

View Full Text


  • Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Provenance and peer review Commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

Linked Articles