SYSTEMATIC REVIEW article
Front. Immunol.
Sec. Cancer Immunity and Immunotherapy
Comparison of drug regimens for recurrent or metastatic cervical cancer: a systematic review and network meta-analysis
Provisionally accepted
- China Pharmaceutical University School of International Pharmaceutical Business, Nanjing, China
Select one of your emails
You have multiple emails registered with Frontiers:
Notify me on publication
Please enter your email address:
If you already have an account, please login
You don't have a Frontiers account ? You can register here
Background: For patients with recurrent or metastatic cervical cancer (R/MCC) after surgery or radiotherapy, drug therapy is the primary treatment modality. Currently, head-to-head comparison studies of different immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) combination regimens are lacking in clinical practice. We provide an indirect comparison of the relative efficacy of various drug regimens (including chemotherapy, targeted therapy, and immunotherapy) for R/MCC patients through a network meta-analysis (NMA). Method: The study adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) reporting guidelines and systematically searched databases including PubMed, Web of Science, Embase and the Cochrane Library for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing drug treatment regimens. The primary efficacy endpoint was overall survival (OS). Progression-free survival (PFS) was analyzed as a secondary endpoint. We conducted the NMA using a Bayesian random-effects model, estimated the ranking of each treatment regimen via the Surface Under the Cumulative Ranking Curve (SUCRA), and performed a Frequentist NMA as a sensitivity analysis. Result: A total of 15 RCTs involving 4,588 R/MCC patients were included. The NMA results for OS showed that ICI combination regimens (with or without bevacizumab) provided a significant benefit compared to backbone chemotherapy. Specifically, the regimen of pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy and bevacizumab showed the greatest potential for OS benefit (Frequentist HR: 0.45, 95%CI: 0.30–0.67 vs. cisplatin plus paclitaxel), ranking first by SUCRA (87%). Among traditional chemotherapy regimens, only the cisplatin plus paclitaxel regimen was significantly superior to single-agent cisplatin (Frequentist HR: 0.74, 95%CI: 0.59–0.93). The results for PFS indicated that the cadonilimab plus chemotherapy regimen was the most outstanding (Frequentist HR: 0.46, 95%CI: 0.32–0.66 vs. cisplatin plus paclitaxel), ranking first by SUCRA (90%). The rankings of the treatment regimens were consistent across both Bayesian and Frequentist, suggesting strong robustness of the results. Conclusion: ICI combination regimens are likely the optimal choice for treating R/MCC patients. Pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy and bevacizumab is most likely to yield the OS benefit, and cisplatin plus paclitaxel remains the best backbone chemotherapy regimen for R/MCC. This study provides comprehensive indirect comparison evidence for clinicians in selecting R/MCC treatment strategies.
Keywords: cervical cancer, Drug Therapy, immunecheckpoint inhibitors, Metastatic, Network meta-analysis, recurrent
Received: 25 Dec 2025; Accepted: 11 Feb 2026.
Copyright: © 2026 Zhou, Ye, Ranarisoa and Lei. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
* Correspondence: Tian Lei
Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.