Mode
Text Size
Log in / Sign up

Meta-analysis finds sex-based differences in ICI survival benefit for advanced gastroesophageal cancerImmunotherapy Works Differently for Men and Women with Stomach Cancer

AI-generated summary of the cited source, checked by automated accuracy review. How we work

Key Takeaway
Consider that this meta-analysis reports a significant OS benefit for ICI in men but not women with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.

This is a meta-analysis of 15 randomized controlled trials evaluating immune-checkpoint inhibition (ICI) for advanced gastroesophageal cancer. The primary outcome was the pooled hazard ratio for overall survival. The analysis found a significant survival benefit for ICI over control in male patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (HR = 0.70, 95% CI = 0.65-0.76, P < .00001). In female patients with this cancer, the benefit was not statistically significant (HR = 0.81, 95% CI = 0.61-1.07, P = .14).

For patients with gastric or gastroesophageal junction cancer, the meta-analysis found a significant survival benefit for ICI in both men (HR = 0.78, 95% CI = 0.73-0.83, P < .00001) and women (HR = 0.82, 95% CI = 0.75-0.90, P < .0001). The analysis of interaction between sex and treatment effect found no significant difference in ICI efficacy between sexes for either esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (Chi = 1.02, P = .31) or gastric/gastroesophageal junction cancer (Chi = 0.78, P = .38).

A key limitation noted by the authors is that most randomized controlled trials on ICI in gastroesophageal cancer were conducted without taking sex differences into account. Safety data were not reported in the source abstract. The practice relevance was not reported. The findings suggest a potential sex-based difference in treatment effect for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma, but this should be interpreted with caution given the limitations.

Imagine you are sitting in a doctor’s office. You have advanced esophageal or stomach cancer. Your doctor says immunotherapy is a standard option. But new research suggests your sex could change how much you benefit. That is a conversation many families will soon have.

Stomach and esophageal cancers are aggressive. They often spread before diagnosis. Immunotherapy, which helps your immune system attack cancer, is now a first-line treatment for many patients. It has improved survival for some. But not everyone responds the same way.

Here is the problem. Most large trials did not analyze results by sex. We know the immune system works differently in men and women. Yet we often apply the same treatment plan to everyone. This leaves a gap in real-world guidance.

But here is the twist. A new meta-analysis looked at 15 randomized trials. It compared immunotherapy plus standard care to standard care alone. The goal was simple. See if men and women with advanced esophageal or stomach cancer gain the same survival benefit.

Think of the immune system like a security team. Immunotherapy is the alarm that wakes the guards. In men, the alarm seems louder for esophageal cancer. In women, the alarm may be quieter. In stomach cancer, the alarm sounds about the same for both sexes.

The study pooled data from first-line trials. That means the first treatment patients received after diagnosis. Seven trials focused on esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. Eight focused on gastric or gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma. Researchers tracked overall survival, which is how long patients lived after starting treatment.

In esophageal cancer, men saw a clear benefit. Their risk of death dropped by about 30 percent. The numbers were strong and statistically significant. Women also saw a benefit, but it was smaller and not statistically significant. The difference between men and women was not large enough to be called a real gap.

In stomach cancer, both sexes benefited. Men saw a 22 percent reduction in death risk. Women saw an 18 percent reduction. Both results were statistically significant. The difference between men and women was not significant. This suggests sex may matter less for stomach cancer than for esophageal cancer.

This does not mean doctors should change treatment based on sex alone.

Experts say these findings add to a growing picture. The immune system responds differently in men and women. That can affect how well immunotherapy works. But other factors matter too, like tumor genetics and overall health. The study did not explore those details.

What does this mean for you or your loved one. If you have advanced esophageal cancer, ask your doctor about immunotherapy. Men may see a clearer survival gain. Women should still consider it, but the benefit may be smaller. If you have stomach cancer, both men and women can expect similar benefits.

The study has limits. It is a meta-analysis, which means it combines data from many trials. Those trials were designed before sex differences were a focus. The number of women in some trials was smaller. That can make it harder to see clear patterns.

What happens next. Researchers will dig deeper into why sex matters for esophageal cancer. They will look at immune markers and tumor biology. Future trials may include more women and analyze results by sex from the start. That will give clearer answers for families and doctors.

Study Details

Study typeMeta analysis
EvidenceLevel 1
PublishedMay 2026
View Original Abstract ↓
Immune-checkpoint-inhibition (ICI) represents the mainstay for treatment of advanced gastroesophageal cancer (GEC) in most cases. Sex differences in innate and adaptive immune responses are known to reflect distinct anti-tumor efficacy of ICI in female and male patients. However, most randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on ICI in GEC were conducted without taking sex differences into account. To address this uncertainty, we conducted a meta-analysis across first-line (1L) RCTs in advanced GEC. Systematic research was performed up to March 31, 2025. The primary endpoint was the pooled hazard ratio (HR) for overall survival (OS) in male and female patients, comparing ICI-based therapy versus control. The secondary objective was to assess the interaction between sex and treatment effect. A total of 15 RCTs were included (7 trials on ESCC and 8 trials on GEA). In male ESCC patients, the pooled HR for OS favored ICI with statistical significance (HR = 0.70, 95% CI = 0.65-0.76, P < .00001). In women, HR was 0.81 (95% CI = 0.61-1.07, P = .14). In GEA, ICI- based therapy showed significant survival benefits in both men (HR = 0.78, 95% CI = 0.73-0.83, P < .00001) and women (HR = 0.82, 95% CI = 0.75-0.90, P < .0001). The test for interaction between sexes and treatment effect indicated no significant difference in ICI efficacy between sexes in ESCC (Chi = 1.02, P = .31) and GEA (Chi = 0.78, P = .38). In advanced ESCC, only men showed a statistically significant OS benefit from ICI-based treatment, but the difference between sexes was not statistically significant. In GEA, both sexes had similar survival benefits.
Free Newsletter

Clinical research that matters. Delivered to your inbox.

Join thousands of clinicians and researchers. No spam, unsubscribe anytime.