ArticleNature medicine2018
Author Correction: Neoadjuvant immune checkpoint blockade in high-risk resectable melanoma.
Article in Nature medicine, 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.
- Neoadjuvant immune checkpoint inhibition in the management of glioblastoma: Exploring a new frontier.Frontiers in immunology · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
- Erratum for
Authors and funding
45 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In the version of this article originally published, there was an error in Fig. 2b. RECIST ORR and pCR were both listed as 25%. RECIST ORR was actually 73%, and pCR was 45%. Also, an author's name was incorrect in the author list. Danny K. Wells should have been listed as Daniel K. Wells. The errors have been corrected in the print, HTML and PDF versions of this article.
Identifiers
30361510What 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.