Immune checkpoint inhibitors in advanced cutaneous melanoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis of efficacy and review of characteristics

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are one of the most promising approaches toward advanced melanoma. Here, we aimed to perform a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to evaluate the efficacy of all studied ICIs. We conducted a comprehensive search to identify the relevant publications (PROSPERO registration ID: CRD42023470649). Then we performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy of different ICIs for metastatic melanoma. We used Cochrane’s tool to assess the quality of studies. The outcome measures were overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and recurrence-free survival (RFS). Twenty reports of RCTs entered our systematic review, 18 of which were included in our data analysis. ICIs showed improved survival compared with control group (hazard ratio (HR) = 0.57; 95% CI: 0.43–0.71; PPR2 = 100.00%). Also, our analysis revealed greater HR for CTLA-4 inhibitors than PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors (HR = 0.71, 95%CI: 0.63–0.79, PP Our results suggest that ICI-based immunotherapy is associated with enhanced OS, PFS, and RFS (P < 0.001) and will assist clinicians in choosing the optimal approach toward treating metastatic melanoma.</p

Additional file 6 of Circulating brain-derived neurotrophic factor as a potential biomarker in stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Additional file 6: Figure 6. Meta-analysis of the BDNF levels in PwS, Week 1 vs Over 1 month. We found no significant difference between the two groups

Additional file 15 of Circulating brain-derived neurotrophic factor as a potential biomarker in stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Additional file 15: Figure 15. Influence analysis, ‘leave one out’ plot, of BDNF levels in physical training subgroup baseline vs. with a delayed period after the training. After omitting the study of Wang et al. 2021 the I2 index reduced to 68%

Additional file 4 of Circulating brain-derived neurotrophic factor as a potential biomarker in stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Additional file 4: Figure 4. Meta-analysis of the BDNF levels in PwS, Baseline vs Over 1 month. We found no significant difference between the two groups

Additional file 13 of Circulating brain-derived neurotrophic factor as a potential biomarker in stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Additional file 13: Figure 13. Influence analysis, ‘leave one out’ plot, of BDNF levels in physical training subgroup baseline vs. immediate after the training. Omitting the study of Anjum et al. 2020 resulted in a non-significant difference between the two groups

Additional file 11 of Circulating brain-derived neurotrophic factor as a potential biomarker in stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Additional file 11: Figure 11. Funnel plot of the studies included in Week 1 vs Over 1 month

Additional file 14 of Circulating brain-derived neurotrophic factor as a potential biomarker in stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Additional file 14: Figure 14. Influence analysis plot of BDNF levels in physical training subgroup baseline vs. with a delayed period after the training. No influential study was found

Additional file 3 of Circulating brain-derived neurotrophic factor as a potential biomarker in stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Additional file 3: Figure 3. Meta-analysis of the BDNF levels in PwS, Day 1 vs Week 1. We found no significant difference between the two groups

Additional file 8 of Circulating brain-derived neurotrophic factor as a potential biomarker in stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Additional file 8: Figure 8. Funnel plot of the studies included in Day 1 vs Week 1

Additional file 9 of Circulating brain-derived neurotrophic factor as a potential biomarker in stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Additional file 9: Figure 9. Funnel plot of the studies included in Baseline vs Over 1 month