ReviewDer Urologe. Ausg. A2018
[Tumor assessment in immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy : Tumor response, progression and pseudoprogression].
Review in Der Urologe. Ausg. A, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In contrast to chemotherapy, treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors occasionally results in an unconventional pattern of response. Besides an early partial or complete response or tumor progression, a so-called pseudoprogression, a "mixed response" or late responses can also be observed. Treatment beyond radiographically defined progression may therefore be appropriate in selected cases. For these treatment decisions, the clinical evaluation of the patient (performance status, symptoms, etc.), the "dynamics" of the underlying malignancy, and the availability of other treatment options are of paramount importance. However, the time to initiate another treatment should not be missed by rapid progression. In PD-1 (programmed cell death protein 1) immune checkpoint inhibition in urothelial cancer after platinum-based chemotherapy, response or progression can be observed early at week 8 in the vast majority of the cases. In contrast, in second-line treatment of renal cell carcinoma around 25% of responses are seen late, at week 24 or later (occasionally after 1 year). Therefore, immune checkpoint inhibition should be continued for stable disease. At present, it remains unclear how long to continue therapy in cases with partial or complete remission.
Indexed as
Identifiers
30334063What 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.