Research Radartracking 24 published studies · 11 human · 11 clinical trials · 14 cancer pages · updated Jun 2026Open the Research Map →

Endometrial Cancer

Auto-discovered from research; not yet curated.

Auto-added · review pending
Educational only: This page is not medical advice. Coordinate decisions with your oncology team.

OncoForge editorial · How we review →

AI extractedhuman reviewedsources checkedretractions suppressed

Evidence at a glanceHuman trial / meta-analysisReported positive
1 published studies that name Endometrial Cancer1 human studies (trial, observational, or meta-analysis)737 source documents in the Endometrial Cancer corpus
Why this grade?

Human trial / meta-analysis — Includes human trial or meta-analysis evidence.

Computed deterministically from the studies’ types and reported outcomes — not written by AI, and not a claim that anything works.

Reported figures

Living document — last change June 9, 2026: New cancer type added.

Overview

Endometrial Cancer is tracked here from the published studies that mention it. This page shows the research evidence collected so far — it is not a curated clinical overview.

What supports this page

The kinds of sources behind this page, strongest at the top. Faint rungs show what is not here yet.

Guideline
28
Meta-analysis
156
Systematic review
22
Randomized trial
0
Clinical trial
2
Observational
1
Case report
14
Review
514
Preclinical
0
Other
0

Evidence on specific compounds

How the published studies grade individual drugs, supplements, and other agents in Endometrial Cancer — each rated by how strong the evidence is, not a recommendation.

What recent studies report in Endometrial Cancer

These are reviewed studies whose abstracts concern Endometrial Cancer. Each describes only what that study reported. This is not a claim by OncoForge that any compound helps or harms Endometrial Cancer. Most are early lab, animal, or small human studies, and findings often conflict.

1 study1 humanTrial (1)

Tracking 1 published study of Endometrial Cancer: 1 in humans.

Reported direction across studies: 1 positive.

These counts summarize what the studies reported; they are not a measure of whether anything works for Endometrial Cancer.

Meta-analysisTrialReported positiveModerate evidenceTier 4 · clinicaln = 2456

Incorporation of anti-PD1 or anti PD-L1 agents to platinum-based chemotherapy for the primary treatment of advanced or recurrent endometrial cancer. A meta-analysis

Cancer treatment reviews · Apr 2024 · meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (first-line ICI + platinum-based chemotherapy vs chemotherapy alone)

advanced endometrial cancerrecurrent endometrial cancerendometrial carcinosarcoma

This meta-analysis pooled five randomized trials (2456 patients) comparing addition of anti-PD-1 or anti-PD-L1 agents to standard platinum-based chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone as first-line treatment for advanced or recurrent endometrial cancer. Adding immune checkpoint inhibitors improved progression-free survival overall and especially in tumors with deficient mismatch repair (dMMR); in mismatch repair–proficient (pMMR) tumors a statistically significant PFS benefit was reported only with anti-PD-1 agents, not anti-PD-L1 agents. The analysis reports PFS outcomes; the impact on overall survival remains to be clarified.

Reported effects: included patients 2456, n=2456 · pooled HR overall 0.63 [0.52–0.76], p <.001, n=2456 · +5 more

Studied with: carboplatin-paclitaxel chemotherapy.

Key findings
  • Five randomized trials comprising 2456 patients (1308 received ICIs + chemotherapy and 1148 chemotherapy alone) were included.
  • Addition of ICIs to chemotherapy improved PFS in the overall population (pooled HR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.52–0.76; P < .001).
  • In the dMMR subgroup the pooled PFS benefit was larger (pooled HR, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.27–0.44; P < .001).
  • In dMMR tumors benefit was seen with both PD-L1 and PD-1 inhibitors (pooled HRs 0.39, 95% CI 0.28–0.55 and 0.34, 95% CI 0.27–0.44, respectively; both P < .001).
  • In pMMR patients a statistically significant PFS benefit was observed only with anti-PD-1 agents (anti-PD-1: HR 0.64, 95% CI 0.46–0.90, P = .010) but not with anti-PD-L1 agents (anti-PD-L1: HR 0.87, 95% CI 0.73–1.03, P = .104).
Limitations: Meta-analysis focused on progression-free survival (PFS); impact on overall survival (OS) is not reported and remains uncertain.; Subgroup analyses by dMMR/pMMR and by drug class (anti-PD-1 vs anti-PD-L1) are based on pooled trial-level data and may be limited by heterogeneity and lack of patient-level data.; Three of five trials included endometrial carcinosarcoma, which may affect generalizability to typical endometrial carcinoma populations.; The abstract does not report safety/toxicity or follow-up duration, limiting assessment of risks and long-term outcomes..

AI summary of the abstract, human-reviewed · Jun 2026. Describes what this study reported, not medical advice. View on PubMed

Browse all studies mentioning Endometrial Cancer →

Clinical trials in Endometrial Cancer

No actively-recruiting trials matched right now. Recruiting is not the same as proven. Search ClinicalTrials.gov →

Heading to an appointment? Get a printable one-page summary — studied compounds, open trials, interactions, and questions to ask.
Bring this to your appointment →