Safety profile of dual TIGIT and PD-L1 blockade with tiragolumab plus atezolizumab in solid tumors: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
- Journal
- Expert opinion on drug safety (Q2)
- Published
- 14 July 2026
- Study design
- Systematic review / meta-analysis of RCTs
- Evidence level
- Level 1, High (CEBM 1a)
- Authors
- Zaher Mutaz Ashour, Mus'ab Theeb Mustafa, Osama Wadah Rammaha, Abdallah Moh'd Said Hamdan, Yihea Mohammad Al-Mashaqbah, Abdallah Yaser Alasmar, et al.
- PMID
- 42446471
- DOI
- 10.1080/14740338.2026.2704844
Why clinicians should know about it
- Picked for Hematology (top studies of the week, 19 July 2026).
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Dual immune-checkpoint blockade targeting T-cell immunoreceptor with Ig and ITIM domains (TIGIT) and programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) shows synergistic antitumor activity. However, its safety profile remains incompletely defined. Our systematic review and meta-analysis aim to evaluate the safety of tiragolumab in combination with atezolizumab (TA) for the treatment of solid tumors. METHODS: We conducted a comprehensive literature search up to March 2026. Eligible studies were Phase II or III randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing TA with atezolizumab-based regimens and reporting adverse events (AEs); pooled risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. RESULTS: Five RCTs involving 1001 patients were included. TA was associated with significantly higher risks of rash (RR 1.66, 95% CI 1.16-2.37), pruritus (RR 2.28, 95% CI 1.65-3.16), and infusion-related reactions (RR 1.80, 95% CI 1.23-2.62). No significant differences were observed for gastrointestinal, hematologic, endocrine, laboratory, or high-grade AEs. Subgroup analyses of TA alone versus atezolizumab alone showed only a significantly higher rash risk (RR 3.85, 95% CI 1.40-10.53). CONCLUSIONS: TA increases rash, pruritus, and infusion-related reactions without a significant rise in severe toxicities. Limited trial numbers and clinical heterogeneity require cautious interpretation and further long-term safety evaluation.
Abstract as published, via PubMed.
For healthcare professionals. The summary is generated by AI from the published abstract, and the evidence level is assigned automatically from the study design on the Oxford CEBM hierarchy. Neither is medical advice. Read the full paper before changing practice.