Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29977349›Full record

ReviewTherapeutic advances in medical oncology2018

Immune-checkpoint inhibitors in melanoma and kidney cancer: from sequencing to rational selection.

Michael Flynn, Lisa Pickering, James Larkin, Samra Turajlic

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Therapeutic advances in medical oncology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 29% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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 2 institutions in 1 country.

Michael FlynnRoyal Marsden Hospital, London, UK.
Lisa PickeringRoyal Marsden Hospital, London, UK.
James LarkinRoyal Marsden Hospital, London, UK.
Samra TurajlicDepartment of Medicine, Skin and Renal Units, Royal Marsden Hospital, 203 Fulham Road, Chelsea, London SW3 6JJ, UK.
Royal Marsden Hospital · GBRoyal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust · GB

Funding

Cancer Research UK 18176
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICPIs), including antibodies against cytotoxic T-lymphocyte associated antigen 4 and programmed cell death protein 1, have been shown to induce durable complete responses in a proportion of patients in the first-line and refractory setting in advanced melanoma and renal cell carcinoma. In fact, there are several lines of both targeted agents and ICPI that are now feasible treatment options. However, survival in the metastatic setting continues to be poor and there remains a need for improved therapeutic approaches. In order to enhance patient selection for the most appropriate next line of therapy, better predictive biomarkers of responsiveness will need to be developed in tandem with technologies to identify mechanisms of ICPI resistance. Adaptive, biomarker-driven trials will drive this evolution. The combination of ICPI with specific chemotherapies, targeted therapies and other immuno-oncology (IO) drugs in order to circumvent ICPI resistance and enhance efficacy is discussed. Recent data support the role for both targeted therapies and ICPI in the adjuvant setting of melanoma and targeted therapies in the adjuvant setting for renal cell carcinoma, which may influence the consideration of treatment on subsequent relapse. Approaches to select the optimal treatment sequences for these patients will need to be refined.

Indexed as

biomarkersimmune-checkpoint inhibitorsmelanomarenal cell carcinomaresistancesequencingtargeted therapies

Identifiers

PMID29977349
PMCPMC6024333
OpenAlexW2807930584

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.