Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27262710›Full record

ReviewCurrent treatment options in oncology2016

Merkel Cell Carcinoma Therapeutic Update.

Nicole M Cassler, Dean Merrill, Christopher K Bichakjian, Isaac Brownell

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Current treatment options in oncology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 49 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
49citing papers in PubMed
7.7field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

49 citing papers in PubMed, 112 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Breast skin merkel cell carcinoma: a case report.American journal of translational research · 2025
    Article
  7. Review
  8. Merkel Cell Carcinoma.Hematology/oncology clinics of North America · 2024
    Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Merkel cell carcinoma.Skin health and disease · 2021
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

4 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Nicole M CasslerDepartment of Dermatology, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, MD, USA.
Dean MerrillUniversity of Missouri-Kansas City School of Medicine, Kansas City, MO, USA.
Christopher K BichakjianDepartment of Dermatology, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Isaac BrownellDermatology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, 10 Center Drive, Bethesda, MD, 20892-1908, USA. Isaac.brownell@nih.gov.
National Cancer Institute · USUniversity of Michigan–Ann Arbor · USUniversity of Missouri–Kansas City · USWalter Reed National Military Medical Center · US

Funding

Molecular pathogenesis of Merkel cell carcinomaZIABC011394 · NCI · DIVISION OF BASIC SCIENCES - NCI · PI BROWNELL, ISAAC · 2011 to 2021
$6.8M
Ipilimumab for treatment of advanced Merkel cell carcinomaZIABC011450 · NCI · DIVISION OF BASIC SCIENCES - NCI · PI BROWNELL, ISAAC · 2012 to 2021
$1.0M
Intramural NIH HHS ZIA BC011450
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

opinion statementMerkel cell carcinoma (MCC) is a rare and aggressive neuroendocrine tumor of the skin. Early-stage disease can be cured with surgical resection and radiotherapy (RT). Sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) is an important staging tool, as a microscopic MCC is frequently identified. Adjuvant RT to the primary excision site and regional lymph node bed may improve locoregional control. However, newer studies confirm that patients with biopsy-negative sentinel lymph nodes may not benefit from regional RT. Advanced MCC currently lacks a highly effective treatment as responses to chemotherapy are not durable. Recent work suggests that immunotherapy targeting the programmed cell death receptor 1/programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-1/PD-L1) checkpoint holds great promise in treating advanced MCC and may provide durable responses in a portion of patients. At the same time, high-throughput sequencing studies have demonstrated significant differences in the mutational profiles of tumors with and without the Merkel cell polyomavirus (MCV). An important secondary endpoint in the ongoing immunotherapy trials for MCC will be determining if there is a response difference between the virus-positive MCC tumors that typically lack a large mutational burden and the virus-negative tumors that have a large number of somatic mutations and predicted tumor neoantigens. Interestingly, sequencing studies have failed to identify a highly recurrent activated driver pathway in the majority of MCC tumors. This may explain why targeted therapies can demonstrate exceptional responses in case reports but fail when treating all comers with MCC. Ultimately, a precision medicine approach may be more appropriate for treating MCC, where identified driver mutations are used to direct targeted therapies. At a minimum, stratifying patients in future clinical trials based on tumor viral status should be considered as virus-negative tumors are more likely to harbor activating driver mutations.

Indexed as

BiomarkersCarcinoma, Merkel CellCombined Modality TherapyDiagnostic ImagingHumansMolecular Targeted TherapySentinel Lymph Node BiopsySkin NeoplasmsBiomarkersAKTAvelumabCabozantinibCM2B4FDG-PETIdelalisibImatinibMCVMerkel cell carcinomaMLN0128mTORNeuroendocrineOctreotidePazopanibPD-1PD-L1PembrolizumabPI3KPolyomavirusVaccineVP1

Identifiers

PMID27262710
PMCPMC5690804
OpenAlexW2409184339

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.