Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28374234›Full record

ReviewCurrent treatment options in neurology2017

Targeted Therapies for Melanoma Brain Metastases.

Anna S Berghoff, Matthias Preusser

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Current treatment options in neurology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

20 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Bevacizumab treatment of meningeal melanoma metastases.Journal of translational medicine · 2020
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. New developments in brain metastases.Therapeutic advances in neurological disorders · 2018
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Overcoming resistance to BRAF inhibitors.Annals of translational medicine · 2017
    Review
  19. Review
  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

2 authors.

Anna S BerghoffDepartment of Medicine I and Comprehensive Cancer Center CNS Unit (CCC-CNS), Medical University of Vienna, Waehringer Guertel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria.
Matthias PreusserDepartment of Medicine I and Comprehensive Cancer Center CNS Unit (CCC-CNS), Medical University of Vienna, Waehringer Guertel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria. matthias.preusser@meduniwien.ac.at.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

opinion statementBrain metastases are a major clinical challenge occurring in up to 60% of patients suffering from metastatic melanoma. They cause significant clinical symptoms and impair the overall survival prognosis. The introduction of targeted therapies including BRAF and MEK inhibitors as well as CTLA-4 and PD-1 axis targeting immune checkpoint inhibitors have dramatically improved the treatment and prognosis of patients with extracranial metastatic melanoma. Although, similar response rates for extra- and intracranial metastases have been reported, only few data from brain metastasis specific trails are available so far. The following review will provide an overview on the currently available data on targeted therapies, remaining questions and the most important side effects in the special clinical situation of melanoma brain metastases.

Indexed as

BRAF inhibitorBrain metastasesImmune checkpoint inhibitorMelanoma

Identifiers

PMID28374234
PMCPMC5378732

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.