ReviewAdvances in experimental medicine and biology2017
Cancer Imaging in Immunotherapy.
Review in Advances in experimental medicine and biology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pseudoprogression and hyperprogression during immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy for urothelial and kidney cancer.World journal of urology · 2018Pooled it
- Article
- A phase I study of the WT2725 dosing emulsion in patients with advanced malignancies.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Immunotherapy to Avoid Orbital Exenteration in Patients With Cutaneous Squamous Cell Carcinoma.Frontiers in oncology · 2021Article
- Nanotherapy delivery of c-myc inhibitor targets Protumor Macrophages and preserves Antitumor Macrophages in Breast Cancer.Theranostics · 2020Article
- Pseudoprogression of Melanoma Brain Metastases.Current oncology reports · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Immune therapeutics are revolutionizing cancer treatments. In tandem, new and confounding imaging characteristics have appeared that are distinct from those typically seen with conventional cytotoxic therapies. In fact, only 10% of patients on immunotherapy may show tumor shrinkage, typical of positive responses on conventional therapy. Conversely, those on immune therapies may initially demonstrate a delayed response, transient enlargement followed by tumor shrinkage, stable size, or the appearance of new lesions. New imaging response criteria such as the immune-related Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (irRECIST) and immune-related Response Criteria (irRC) are being implemented in many trials. However, FDA approval of emerging therapies including immunotherapies still relies on the current RECIST criteria. In this review, we review the traditional and new imaging response criteria for evaluation of solid tumors and briefly touch on some of the more commonly associated immunotherapy-induced adverse events.
Indexed as
Identifiers
28321816What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.