ReviewReported positivePreclinical onlyTier 1 · lab
Molecular biology reports · May 2026 · narrative review
Genisteinbreast cancerovarian cancerprostate cancergliomaneuroblastomahepatocellular carcinomalung cancerbladder cancerosteosarcomarhabdomyosarcoma This is a narrative review of the biological activities and potential therapeutic roles of soy isoflavones (including genistein and daidzein). The authors summarize proposed anticancer mechanisms (estrogen receptor modulation, apoptosis, anti-angiogenesis, epigenetic effects, etc.) and report that in vitro and in vivo studies have shown promising results across a range of tumor types. They conclude that further research—especially studies combining isoflavones with established chemotherapeutics—is needed.
Studied with: chemotherapeutic agents.
Key findings
- Soy isoflavones (genistein, daidzein) have estrogenic and non-estrogenic activities including anti-inflammatory, antioxidant, and immunomodulatory effects.
- Proposed anticancer mechanisms include modulation of estrogen receptors, copper ion-dependent induction of cell death, promotion of apoptosis, inhibition of angiogenesis and metastasis, regulation of epigenetic processes, and effects on platelet function.
- Because of estrogen receptor interactions, isoflavones have been studied particularly in hormone-dependent cancers such as breast, ovarian, and prostate cancer.
- In vitro and in vivo studies have reported promising results in multiple malignancies (gliomas, neuroblastoma, hepatocellular carcinoma, lung and bladder cancers, osteosarcoma, rhabdomyosarcoma).
- Authors recommend further investigation, particularly combining isoflavones with established chemotherapeutics, to evaluate potential synergy.
Limitations: This article is a narrative review and does not present new clinical trial data.; The evidence summarized is primarily preclinical (in vitro and in vivo) with no clinical trial data provided in the abstract.; Mechanistic proposals are not proven clinical effects and require further experimental and clinical validation.; Safety and efficacy in patients, optimal dosing, and interactions with standard therapies are not established in this review..
AI summary of the abstract, human-reviewed · Jul 2026. Describes what this study reported, not medical advice. View on PubMed · Full text
ReviewMechanismMixed resultsModerate evidenceTier 4 · clinical
Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network : JNCCN · Apr 2026
non-small cell lung cancer
These NCCN guidelines summarize recommendations for diagnosis, primary management, surveillance, and subsequent treatment of patients with non-small cell lung cancer. The panel updated the list of recommended targeted therapies based on recent FDA approvals and clinical data. This selection focuses on treatment recommendations for advanced or metastatic NSCLC with actionable biomarkers.
Key findings
- The guideline provides recommendations for diagnosis, primary disease management, surveillance, and subsequent treatment of NSCLC.
- The panel updated the list of recommended targeted therapies based on recent FDA approvals and clinical data.
- This selection focuses on treatment recommendations for advanced or metastatic NSCLC with actionable biomarkers.
Limitations: This is a clinical practice guideline summary, not primary research reporting new experimental data.; The abstract provides no quantitative outcomes, study methods, or details of evidence grading.; No single compound or specific treatment regimen is described in the abstract.; Details on how recommendations were derived (e.g., evidence review methods) are not provided in the abstract..
AI summary of the abstract, human-reviewed · Jul 2026. Describes what this study reported, not medical advice. View on PubMed
Human trialTrialReported positiveModerate evidenceTier 4 · clinicaln = 298
International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics · Feb 2026 · Phase 3 randomized controlled multicenter trial
non-small-cell lung cancer brain metastases (NSCLC BM)
This phase 3 randomized trial compared stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) followed by Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields, 150 kHz) versus SRS alone in 298 adults with 1–10 newly diagnosed brain metastases from NSCLC. TTFields significantly delayed time to intracranial progression (HR 0.72) and reduced intracranial progression rates at multiple time points; device-related adverse events were mainly grade ≤2 skin events and there was no deterioration in quality of life or cognitive function. Subgroup analyses in patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors (n = 118) showed more pronounced delays in intracranial progression. Some analyses were reported post hoc and median follow-up was 8.6 months.
Reported effects: TTIP HR 0.72 [0.53–0.98], p P = .044, n=298 · Intracranial progression rate at month 2 13.6%, p P = .034, n=298 · +6 more
Studied with: stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS), immune checkpoint inhibitors.
Key findings
- TTFields significantly delayed time to intracranial progression (TTIP) compared with SRS alone (HR 0.72, 95% CI 0.53-0.98; Fine-Gray P = .044).
- Intracranial progression rates for TTFields versus SRS alone were 13.6% versus 22.1% at month 2 (P = .034), 33.7% versus 46.4% at month 6 (P = .018), 46.9% versus 59.4% at month 12 (P = .023), and 53.6% versus 65.2% at month 24 (P = .031; post hoc).
- Time to distant intracranial progression favored TTFields but was not statistically significant (HR 0.76, 95% CI 0.51-1.12; log-rank P = .165; post hoc).
- In the subgroup receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors (n = 118), TTIP delay had HR 0.63 (95% CI 0.39-1.0; Cox P = .049; Fine-Gray P = .055) and time to distant intracranial progression HR 0.41 (95% CI 0.21-0.81; log-rank P = .0087; post hoc).
- Device-related adverse events were mainly grade ≤2 skin events.
- TTFields did not cause quality-of-life deterioration, and post hoc analyses showed improvements in deterioration-free survival and time to deterioration for global health status, physical functioning, and fatigue domains.
Limitations: Median follow-up was relatively short (median 8.6 months, range 0.07–85.2).; Several analyses reported were post hoc (intracranial progression at 24 months, distant progression analyses, QoL domain analyses).; Subgroup analyses (patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors, n = 118) are smaller and may be underpowered or exploratory.; Abstract does not report long-term neurotoxicity beyond the follow-up range stated..
AI summary of the abstract, human-reviewed · Jul 2026. Describes what this study reported, not medical advice. View on PubMed
ReviewReported positiveModerate evidenceTier 4 · clinical
The Journal of nutrition · Nov 2025 · review
colorectal cancerbreast cancerendometrial cancerlung cancer
This review summarizes epidemiologic evidence linking red and processed meat consumption with higher risks of multiple chronic diseases, including colorectal, breast, endometrial, and lung cancers, type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and all-cause mortality. It reports that processed meats show stronger associations than unprocessed red meat, with dose-response relationships indicating elevated risks even at moderate intakes. The authors describe plausible biological mechanisms (carcinogen formation, inflammation, gut microbiome changes, heme iron, TMAO, and metabolic effects) and note inconsistencies such as short-term randomized trial biomarker findings and modification of risk by overall diet, lifestyle, and genetics. The review concludes that minimizing processed meat and replacing red/processed meats with plant proteins, poultry, or fish is expected to reduce disease risk, and it calls for further research on causality, mechanisms, and population diversity.
Studied with: plant proteins, poultry, fish.
Key findings
- Observational studies and meta-analyses show positive associations between red/processed meat consumption and multiple chronic diseases, including colorectal, breast, endometrial, and lung cancers, type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and all-cause mortality.
- Dose-response relationships indicate elevated risks even at moderate intakes.
- Processed meats consistently show stronger detrimental associations than unprocessed red meats.
- Mechanistic pathways discussed include carcinogen formation, proinflammatory effects, gut microbiome dysbiosis, heme iron, trimethylamine N-oxide (TMAO), saturated fats, and effects on lipid metabolism and insulin resistance.
- Replacing red/processed meats with plant proteins, poultry, or fish is associated with reduced disease risk according to the review.
- Evidence complexities include inconsistent randomized controlled trial findings on short-term biomarkers and substantial modification of risk by processing, cooking methods, overall diet, lifestyle, and genetic factors.
Limitations: Predominantly observational epidemiologic evidence, which is susceptible to confounding and cannot establish causality.; Inconsistent randomized controlled trial findings limited to short-term biomarkers rather than clinical endpoints.; Heterogeneity introduced by differences in processing methods, cooking techniques, and definitions of processed versus unprocessed meat.; Potential modification of associations by overall diet, lifestyle, and genetic factors, complicating interpretation.; Identified gaps include need for greater mechanistic specificity, more diverse populations, and integrated health-environment assessments..
AI summary of the abstract, human-reviewed · Jul 2026. Describes what this study reported, not medical advice. View on PubMed
ReviewMechanismInconclusiveLimited evidenceTier 4 · clinical
Cancers · Sep 2025 · review
pleuropulmonary blastomaSertoli-Leydig cell tumorcystic nephromacervical embryonal rhabdomyosarcomacystic lung lesionsthyroid follicular nodular disease
This is a narrative review of DICER1 syndrome, a hereditary cancer predisposition caused by germline loss-of-function variants in DICER1 and characteristic second somatic hotspot mutations in the RNase IIIb domain. The review summarizes the range of associated benign and malignant tumors, describes DICER1's role as an endoribonuclease in RNA interference and microRNA processing, and concludes that the exact molecular mechanisms linking altered DICER1 function to tumorigenesis remain incompletely understood and require further research.
Key findings
- DICER1 syndrome is a hereditary cancer predisposition syndrome with a broad phenotype including pleuropulmonary blastoma, Sertoli-Leydig cell tumor, cystic nephroma, cervical embryonal rhabdomyosarcoma, cystic lung lesions, and thyroid follicular nodular disease.
- The syndrome is caused by loss-of-function germline variants in the DICER1 gene and DICER1-related tumors commonly have second somatic hotspot variants in the RNase IIIb domain.
- DICER1 encodes an endoribonuclease important for RNA interference and microRNA biogenesis.
- The review highlights gaps in knowledge about the precise molecular mechanisms by which altered DICER1 function contributes to tumorigenesis and calls for more research.
Limitations: Narrative review without original experimental or patient-level data.; Conclusions limited by existing incomplete knowledge of molecular mechanisms as noted by the authors.; Review methodology is not described in the abstract (e.g., not specified as a systematic review), so selection bias in covered literature is possible..
AI summary of the abstract, human-reviewed · Jul 2026. Describes what this study reported, not medical advice. View on PubMed · Full text
ReviewMechanismInconclusiveLimited evidenceTier 4 · clinical
Expert review of anticancer therapy · Sep 2025 · narrative review
large cell neuroendocrine carcinoma of the lung
This narrative review summarizes current knowledge about large cell neuroendocrine carcinoma (LCNEC) of the lung, focusing on diagnostic criteria, molecular alterations, the tumor microenvironment including immune components, and ongoing clinical trials including immuno-oncology. The authors emphasize that LCNEC is a heterogeneous disease with distinct developmental trajectories that complicate diagnosis and clinical decision-making. They suggest this heterogeneity may provide a rationale for personalized targeted approaches or immunotherapy in patient subsets, but conclude that further studies using a holistic framework are needed.
Key findings
- LCNEC of the lung is described as a high-grade non-small cell carcinoma with neuroendocrine morphology and neuroendocrine markers.
- Diagnosis and therapeutic decision-making are challenging, likely because LCNEC comprises a heterogeneous mix of genetic and epigenetic alterations intertwined with the host microenvironment.
- The review structures LCNEC knowledge across three outlooks: (i) diagnostic criteria and molecular alterations; (ii) microenvironmental changes, including the immune system; and (iii) available clinical trials, including immune-oncology studies.
- Different developmental trajectories of LCNEC may explain diagnostic and treatment difficulties and may offer a rationale for personalized targeted therapies or immunotherapy in subsets of patients.
- The authors call for future studies to frame LCNEC within a broader, holistic context among lung cancers rather than viewing it as a single, isolated tumor type.
Limitations: Narrative review that does not present original experimental or clinical data.; Abstract emphasizes heterogeneity and diagnostic challenges, which limit definitive clinical recommendations.; No quantitative synthesis or meta-analysis is reported in the abstract.; Authors state that readiness for a major change in understanding LCNEC is unresolved and further studies are needed..
AI summary of the abstract, human-reviewed · Jun 2026. Describes what this study reported, not medical advice. View on PubMed
OtherMixed resultsModerate evidenceTier 4 · clinical
Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network : JNCCN · Sep 2025 · Practice Guideline
non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC)
This document summarizes recent updates to the NCCN Guidelines for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The updates focus on systemic therapy options for patients with nonmetastatic NSCLC and on corresponding molecular testing considerations.
Key findings
- The NCCN Guidelines Insights present recent updates for NSCLC management.
- The discussion emphasizes systemic therapy options for nonmetastatic NSCLC.
- The guidance highlights molecular testing considerations that correspond to systemic therapy choices.
Limitations: Abstract provides no details on specific therapies, recommended regimens, or testing algorithms.; No primary data, numerical results, or methods are reported in the abstract.; As a guideline summary, it synthesizes evidence rather than presenting new experimental or clinical trial data..
AI summary of the abstract, human-reviewed · Jun 2026. Describes what this study reported, not medical advice. View on PubMed
Animal studyReported positivePreclinical onlyTier 2 · animal
Cell reports · Aug 2025 · mouse models and NSCLC cell lines; gut microbiota comparison in patients with NSCLC and healthy controls
This study looked at gut bacteria and a bacterial metabolite in non-small cell lung cancer. The authors found that Bifidobacterium animalis was lower in patients with NSCLC, and in mouse models and cell lines it was associated with less tumor progression. They identified indole-3-acetic acid as a key metabolite and reported that it affected AHR/METTL3/STAT3 signaling and immune cells in ways linked to reduced tumor growth.
Key findings
- Bifidobacterium animalis was markedly decreased in patients with NSCLC compared with healthy controls.
- B. animalis suppressed tumor progression in two NSCLC mouse models and NSCLC cell lines.
- Indole-3-acetic acid was identified as the pivotal metabolite of B. animalis with anti-NSCLC properties.
- B. animalis and IAA activated AHR and suppressed METTL3 and STAT3 m6A methylation.
- B. animalis and IAA reduced M2 macrophage polarization and enhanced CD8+ T cell functions by suppressing IL-6.
Limitations: Preclinical findings dominate the study; the anticancer effects were shown in mouse models and cell lines, not in a human trial.; Human data were observational/comparative microbiome profiling only, so causality cannot be established.; The abstract does not provide sample sizes, doses, or follow-up duration.; The abstract does not report clinical outcomes in patients..
The study links a gut bacterium and its metabolite to NSCLC progression and antitumor immunity in preclinical models.
AI summary of the abstract, human-reviewed · Jun 2026. Describes what this study reported, not medical advice. View on PubMed
ReviewReported positiveLimited evidenceTier 4 · clinical
Current issues in molecular biology · Aug 2025 · review
non-small-cell lung cancercancer cells (general)
This review summarizes research from 2020–2025 on mistletoe (Viscum album) in cancer biology, covering new molecular mechanisms, immunomodulatory effects, and clinical observations. It reports preclinical findings of immunogenic cell death (calreticulin exposure, ATP release) and immune changes (IL-6/IL-10 shifts), cites real-world data in >400 NSCLC patients suggesting longer median overall survival when mistletoe is combined with PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors, and notes a Phase I trial reporting IV safety at 600 mg three times weekly. The authors call for further standardized clinical research and advanced mechanistic studies.
Reported effects: calreticulin exposure (% of cancer cells) · ATP release (fold change) 7 · +5 more
Studied with: PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors.
Key findings
- Mistletoe extracts trigger endoplasmic reticulum stress, leading to calreticulin exposure in 18-51% of cancer cells and a 7-fold increase in adenosine triphosphate (ATP) release.
- Three-dimensional culture models showed a 15.8% increase in pro-inflammatory IL-6 and a 26.4% reduction in immunosuppressive IL-10, indicating macrophage reprogramming effects.
- Real-world evidence from over 400 non-small-cell lung cancer patients shows that combining mistletoe with PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors doubles median overall survival (6.8 to 13.8 months).
- Biomarker-selected populations in the cited real-world data experienced up to a 91.2% reduction in death risk.
- The Johns Hopkins Phase I trial established intravenous administration safety at 600 mg three times weekly.
- Authors report that advanced analytics (metabolomics, chronobiology, machine learning) are being used to enable precision-medicine applications.
Limitations: This publication is a review (secondary synthesis) rather than a single prospective randomized trial.; The real-world evidence cited is observational (over 400 NSCLC patients) and may be subject to confounding and selection bias.; The Phase I trial reported safety but does not establish efficacy.; Many findings summarized are preclinical (cell culture, 3D models), limiting direct clinical inference.; Heterogeneity of included studies and lack of standardized clinical protocols are noted as issues..
Review synthesizes preclinical mechanisms and limited clinical/real-world evidence on mistletoe in cancer, including combination with immune checkpoint inhibitors.
AI summary of the abstract, human-reviewed · Jul 2026. Describes what this study reported, not medical advice. View on PubMed · Full text
Human · observationalMechanismMixed resultsLimited evidenceTier 3 · early humann = 590
Nature communications · Aug 2025 · cohort study (two independent clinical/genomic cohorts)
pulmonary large cell neuroendocrine carcinoma (LCNEC)small cell lung cancer (SCLC)non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)
The authors analyzed clinical and molecular data from 590 patients with pulmonary large cell neuroendocrine carcinoma across two cohorts. They identified two genomic subtypes (NSCLC-like with KEAP1/KRAS/STK11 mutations and SCLC-like with RB1/TP53 mutations) and report that 80% of tumors aligned with SCLC transcriptional profiles. The study found elevated FGL-1 and SPINK1 expression in NSCLC-like LCNECs and higher DLL3 in SCLC-like LCNECs, and noted fewer tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes in LCNEC compared with other lung cancers. Overall survival was comparable across chemotherapy, chemoimmunotherapy, and immunotherapy in this cohort.
Reported effect: proportion aligning with SCLC transcriptional profiles 80%, n=590
Key findings
- Study cohort: 590 patients across two independent cohorts.
- Comparable overall survival across treatment regimens (chemotherapy, chemoimmunotherapy, immunotherapy) without unexpected adverse events.
- Genomic analysis identified two LCNEC subtypes: NSCLC-like (KEAP1, KRAS, STK11 mutations) and SCLC-like (RB1, TP53 mutations).
- 80% of LCNEC tumors aligned with SCLC transcriptional profiles.
- Serial sampling showed stable mutational landscapes but shifting transcriptomic profiles over time.
- Elevated FGL-1 (a LAG-3 ligand) and SPINK1 expression were observed in NSCLC-like LCNECs; DLL3 levels were higher in SCLC-like LCNECs.
- Immunofluorescence confirmed FGL-1 expression in NSCLC-like LCNECs.
- H&E analyses indicated fewer tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes in LCNECs versus other lung cancers.
- Authors suggest these immunogenomic features support future investigation of LAG-3, SPINK1, and DLL3-targeted approaches.
Limitations: Observational cohort design — no randomized comparison of treatments reported in the abstract.; Abstract provides no quantitative survival or subgroup outcome measures (no effect sizes or statistical details reported).; Molecular associations (expression of FGL-1, SPINK1, DLL3) are descriptive and do not demonstrate therapeutic efficacy.; Functional or clinical validation of proposed targets is not presented in the abstract.; H&E-based assessment of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes is a histologic surrogate and may lack detailed immunophenotyping..
Identifies immunogenomic subtypes and candidate targets (FGL-1/LAG-3, SPINK1, DLL3) in LCNEC that may guide future therapeutic investigations.
AI summary of the abstract, human-reviewed · Jun 2026. Describes what this study reported, not medical advice. View on PubMed · Full text
Human · observationalSupportive careMixed resultsModerate evidenceTier 3 · early humann = 267586
Journal of the National Cancer Institute · Aug 2025 · prospective cohort study
Supportive carecervical cancerHodgkin lymphomaprostate cancerbreast cancercolorectal cancerlung cancerendometrial canceroral cavity and pharynx cancerkidney cancerovarian cancersarcomamelanomaleukemia
Researchers followed participants in three large prospective cohorts for up to 36 years to examine whether a cancer diagnosis was associated with later atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). They documented 4,334 new ASCVD events among 49,603 incident cancer cases and found that cervical cancer and Hodgkin lymphoma were associated with higher ASCVD risk, prostate cancer with slightly lower risk, and that ASCVD risk trajectories over time varied by cancer type (for example, breast cancer survivors had lower ASCVD risk for the first 7.5 years, then risk increased).
Reported effects: new-onset ASCVD events among incident cancer cases 4334, n=49603 · cervical cancer HR 1.56 [1.06–2.29] · +6 more
Key findings
- During up to 36 years of follow-up, 4,334 new-onset ASCVD events among 49,603 incident cancer cases were documented.
- Cervical cancer was associated with increased ASCVD incidence (HR = 1.56, 95% CI = 1.06 to 2.29).
- Hodgkin lymphoma was associated with increased ASCVD incidence (HR = 2.80, 95% CI = 1.89 to 4.15).
- Prostate cancer was associated with lower ASCVD incidence (HR = 0.91, 95% CI = 0.85 to 0.97).
- Breast cancer survivors experienced lower ASCVD risk during the first 7.5 years after diagnosis, but risk gradually increased afterward (Pnonlinearity = .01).
- ASCVD risk increased over time among patients with cancers of the colorectum (P = .003), lung (P = .002), and endometrium (P = .04).
- No statistically significant association with ASCVD risk was observed for cancers of the oral cavity and pharynx, kidney, or ovary; sarcoma; melanoma; or leukemia.
Limitations: Observational cohort design cannot establish causality.; Potential for residual confounding despite multivariable adjustment.; Cohorts consist of nurses and health professionals, which may limit generalizability to other populations.; Abstract does not report details on cancer stage or treatments, which could influence ASCVD risk..
AI summary of the abstract, human-reviewed · Jun 2026. Describes what this study reported, not medical advice. View on PubMed · Full text
ReviewFormulationReported positiveLimited evidenceTier 4 · clinical
Small methods · Jul 2025 · review
non-small cell lung cancer
This is a review article summarizing how nanomedicines are being developed to support immunotherapy for non-small cell lung cancer. The authors survey core features and the current clinical status of strategies such as immune checkpoint blockade, antibody-drug conjugates, cell engagers, adoptive cells, and cancer vaccines, and emphasize recent nanomedicine developments that may boost these approaches. The abstract highlights advantages of nanomedicines including tumor targeting, improved bioavailability, reduced systemic toxicity, and potential to overcome immune resistance. No new experimental data or quantitative results are reported in the abstract.
Studied with: immune checkpoint blockade, antibody-drug conjugates, cell engagers, adoptive cells, cancer vaccines.
Key findings
- Nanomedicines may offer advantages including specific targeting of tumor cells, improved drug bioavailability, reduced systemic toxicity, and overcoming of immune resistance.
- The review surveys the core features and current clinical status of NSCLC immunotherapy strategies: immune checkpoint blockade, antibody-drug conjugates, cell engagers, adoptive cells, and cancer vaccines.
- Particular emphasis is placed on recent developments of nanomedicines that boost these immunotherapy strategies.
Limitations: This is a review article; no new experimental or clinical trial data are presented in the abstract.; Abstract provides no quantitative results, sample sizes, doses, or outcome metrics.; Species, specific clinical trial identifiers, and funding sources are not specified in the abstract..
AI summary of the abstract, human-reviewed · Jun 2026. Describes what this study reported, not medical advice. View on PubMed
Human · observationalMixed resultsLimited evidenceTier 3 · early humann = 11310
Lung cancer (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · Jun 2025 · prospective registry study (Japanese Joint Committee of Lung Cancer Registry)
large cell neuroendocrine carcinomasmall cell lung cancersquamous cell carcinomaadenocarcinoma
This prospective registry study analyzed 11,310 Japanese lung cancer patients (80 with LCNEC) from January 2012 to April 2016 to compare clinical characteristics, chemotherapy response, and survival across histologies. LCNEC patients were mostly older male smokers and had lower overall response and disease control rates to first-line cisplatin- or carboplatin-based chemotherapy in stage IV disease compared with SCLC. Three-year survival was similar between LCNEC (14.2%) and SCLC (15.9%), and Cox analysis showed no statistically significant difference in overall survival (HR 0.818, 95% CI 0.611-1.096, p = 0.178).
Reported effects: cohort_size 11310, n=11310 · LCNEC_count 80, n=80 · +9 more
Key findings
- Total cohort: 11,310 patients from the JJCLCR database.
- In total, 80 patients (0.7%) were diagnosed with LCNEC.
- LCNEC patients had median age 68 years, 93.8% men, and 97.5% smokers.
- In stage IV patients, best overall response and disease control rates for first-line cisplatin-based chemotherapy were 34.8% and 43.5% for LCNEC but 60.6% and 69.7% for SCLC.
- For first-line carboplatin-based chemotherapy in stage IV patients, overall response and disease control rates were 29.4% and 41.2% for LCNEC, but 56.1% and 68.4% for SCLC.
- The 3-year survival rates were 14.2% for LCNEC, 15.9% for SCLC, 17.8% for squamous cell carcinoma, and 27.1% for adenocarcinoma.
- Cox hazard analysis comparing overall survival between LCNEC and SCLC showed hazard ratio 0.818 (95% CI 0.611-1.096, p = 0.178), not statistically significant.
Limitations: Small number of LCNEC cases (80) relative to the full registry cohort.; Observational registry design without randomized treatment assignment.; Potential heterogeneity in treatments and management across registry sites.; Follow-up limited to registry period (opened Jan 2012; completed Apr 2016) with no median follow-up duration reported in the abstract..
AI summary of the abstract, human-reviewed · Jun 2026. Describes what this study reported, not medical advice. View on PubMed
ReviewReported positiveModerate evidenceTier 4 · clinical
The oncologist · Feb 2025 · narrative review
glioblastomagrade 4 gliomapediatric central nervous system tumorsbrain metastaseslung cancerovarian cancerpancreatic cancergastric cancerhepatic cancer
This review summarizes Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields), a noninvasive device that delivers alternating electric fields to tumors. It reports mechanisms of action (mitotic disruption, DNA replication/DNA damage response effects, reduced motility, and immune enhancement), notes FDA approval for newly diagnosed and recurrent glioblastoma, and describes clinical data showing efficacy across patient groups, a tolerable safety profile, and correlations between higher device usage/dose and longer survival. The review also highlights promising pilot studies combining TTFields with immunotherapy and radiotherapy and ongoing studies in pediatric patients and other solid tumors.
Studied with: immunotherapy, radiotherapy.
Key findings
- TTFields is a locoregional, noninvasive, portable device that delivers alternating electric fields to tumors through arrays placed on the skin.
- Based on global pivotal randomized phase III clinical studies, TTFields therapy (Optune Gio) is FDA-approved for newly diagnosed and recurrent glioblastoma and CE-marked for grade 4 glioma.
- Multimodal mechanisms include disruption of cancer cell mitosis, inhibition of DNA replication and damage response, interference with cell motility, and enhancement of systemic adaptive immunity.
- Clinical data show efficacy in a broad range of patients with a tolerable safety profile, including high-risk subpopulations.
- New analyses confirmed that overall and progression-free survival positively correlated with increased device usage and dose of TTFields at the tumor site.
- Pilot/early phase clinical studies of TTFields with immunotherapy and with radiotherapy in newly diagnosed GBM have shown promise; new pivotal studies are planned.
- Recent and ongoing studies are evaluating TTFields in pediatric care, other CNS tumors, brain metastases, and several advanced-stage solid tumors (lung, ovarian, pancreatic, gastric, hepatic).
Limitations: This article is a narrative review rather than original research; the abstract does not present new primary numeric results.; Abstract provides no numeric effect sizes, confidence intervals, p-values, or sample sizes for the studies discussed.; Claims about broader tumor types, pediatric use, and combinations are based on pilot/early-phase studies and ongoing research and thus remain preliminary.; Potential for selection or publication bias in the reviewed literature is not addressed in the abstract.; Funding sources and potential conflicts of interest are not reported in the abstract..
The review focuses on TTFields therapy's mechanisms, clinical efficacy/safety data in glioblastoma, and exploratory uses in other CNS and solid tumors.
AI summary of the abstract, human-reviewed · Jul 2026. Describes what this study reported, not medical advice. View on PubMed · Full text