Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26784231›Full record

ReviewCancers2016

Updates in Therapy for Advanced Melanoma.

Bhavana P Singh, April K S Salama

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cancers, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
4.6field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

22 citing papers in PubMed, 49 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Long non-coding RNAs in melanoma.Cell proliferation · 2018
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Checkpoint inhibitors for malignant melanoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Clinical, cosmetic and investigational dermatology · 2017
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. [Anorectal malignant melanoma : Treatment recommendations].Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen · 2016
    Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Bhavana P SinghDepartment of Internal Medicine, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC 27710, USA. bhavana.pendurthi@dm.duke.edu.
April K S SalamaDivision of Medical Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC 27710, USA. april.salama@dm.duke.edu.
Duke Medical Center · USDuke University Hospital · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cutaneous melanoma is one of the most aggressive forms of skin cancer, and is correlated with a large proportion of skin cancer-related deaths. Therapy for cutaneous melanoma has advanced greatly through careful identification of therapeutic targets and the development of novel immunotherapeutic approaches. The identification of BRAF as well as other driver mutations, have allowed for a specialized approach to treatment. In addition, immune checkpoint inhibition has dramatically changed the treatment landscape over the past 5-10 years. The successful targeting of CTLA-4, as well as PD-1/PD-L1, has been translated into meaningful clinical benefit for patients, with multiple other potential agents in development. Systemic therapy for cutaneous melanoma is becoming more nuanced and often takes a multifaceted strategy. This review aims to discuss the benefits and limitations of current therapies in systemic melanoma treatment as well as areas of future development.

Indexed as

BRAFCTLA-4immunotherapyMEKmelanomaPD-1targeted therapy

Identifiers

PMID26784231
PMCPMC4728464
OpenAlexW2235263910

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.