What question did this study set out to answer?

To correct previous inaccuracies regarding the association of fatal adverse events with PD-L1 inhibitors.

February 21, 2026Open Access

Correction: Fatal adverse events associated with programmed cell death ligand 1 inhibitors: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Key Points

To correct previous inaccuracies regarding the association of fatal adverse events with PD-L1 inhibitors.
Systematic review was conducted on published articles reporting adverse events of PD-L1 inhibitors.
Meta-analysis performed to quantify publication bias and other outcomes.
Funnel plots and Egger tests were employed to assess publication bias.
Significant publication bias was identified based on the Egger test (p < 0.01).
Corrections made to the funding statement and results section to reflect accurate data about publication bias.
The extent of biases introduced by including specific studies was clarified.

Abstract

• Pick the most relevant text template(s) from the following page and delete all others.• Edit the text as necessary, ensuring that the original incorrect text is included for the record, please see the below.• Please do not use any extra formatting when editing the templates, and only modify the red text unless absolutely necessary• Submit to Frontiers following the instructions on this page.When the original text contained incorrect information, to preserve the scientific record, please include that text when editing the below templates. For example:There was a mistake in the Funding statement, an incorrect number was used. The correct number is "2015C03Bd051.". The publisher apologizes for this mistake.Frontiers Media SA 2The original version of this article has been updated.In the published article, there was a mistake in the Funding statement. Egger et al., 1997)."The corrected sentence appears below:"The funnel plot and Egger tests were used to estimate the publication bias of this study (Egger et al., 1997)."2. A correction has been made to the section 3 Results, Publication Bias, Paragraph Number 1. This sentence previously stated: "However, there was no evidence to prove publication bias existed in this study based on Begger's test (p = 0.57). Moreover, when 26 eligible studies and 44 ineligible ones were included in the analysis, there was a significant publication bias based on Begger's test (p < 0.0001)."The corrected sentence appears below:"There was publication bias existed in this study based on Egger test (p <0.01)"A correction has been made to the section 4 Discussion, Paragraph Number 2. This sentence previously stated:"However, the inclusion of these studies would introduce substantial bias based on the Begger's test (p < 0.0001)."The original version of this article has been updated.End of template. If you would like to request a correction for a reason not seen here, please contact the

Mark Helpful

Bookmark

Relay

View Full Paper