ReviewMelanoma management2018
Checkpoint inhibitor use in two heart transplant patients with metastatic melanoma and review of high-risk populations.
Review in Melanoma management, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Application of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in Solid Organ Transplantation Recipients: A Systematic Review.Interdisciplinary sciences, computational life sciences · 2021Pooled it
- The Safety and Efficacy of Checkpoint Inhibitors in Transplant Recipients: A Case Series and Systematic Review of Literature.The oncologist · 2020Pooled it
- Regulatory T cells in cardiac allograft vasculopathy: from mechanistic insights to clinical tolerance.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
- Primary prophylaxis with mTOR inhibitor enhances T cell effector function and prevents heart transplant rejection during talimogene laherparepvec therapy of squamous cell carcinoma.Nature communications · 2024Article
- Use of immune checkpoint inhibitors in solid organ transplant recipients with advanced cutaneous malignancies.Frontiers in transplantation · 2023Article
- Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Myocarditis and Cellular Rejection in Orthotopic Heart Transplant Recipients.JACC. CardioOncology · 2022Review
- Immune checkpoint inhibitors for solid organ transplant recipients: clinical updates.Korean journal of transplantation · 2022Review
- Article
- Uncoupling Therapeutic Efficacy from Immune-Related Adverse Events in Immune Checkpoint Blockade.iScience · 2020Review
- T cell checkpoint regulators in the heart.Cardiovascular research · 2019Review
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Due to the unique side-effect profile of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), groups of patients deemed to be at high risk of complications were excluded from trials that proved the efficacy and safety of these agents in patients with various malignancies. Among these excluded patients were those with prior solid organ transplantation, chronic viral infections and pre-existing autoimmune diseases including paraneoplastic syndromes. We present follow-up on a patient from a previously published case report with an orthotopic heart transplantation who was treated with both cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen 4 and PD-1 inhibition safely, without organ rejection. Additionally, we describe the case of a patient with a cardiac allograft who also did not experience organ rejection after treatment with pembrolizumab. Through smaller trials, retrospective analyses, case series and individual case reports, we are accumulating initial data on how these agents are tolerated by the aforementioned groups. Our survey of the literature has found more evidence of organ transplant rejection in patients treated with PD-1 inhibitors than those treated with inhibitors of cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen 4. Patients with chronic viral infections, especially hepatitis C, seem to have little to no risk of treatment-related increase in serum RNA levels. The literature contains few documented cases of devastating exacerbations of pre-existing autoimmune disease during treatment with ICIs, and flares seem to be easily controlled by immunosuppression in the vast majority of cases. Last, several cases allude to a promising role for disease-specific antibodies and other serum biomarkers in identifying patients at high risk of developing certain immune-related adverse events, detecting subclinical immune-related adverse event onset, and monitoring treatment response to immunosuppressive therapy in patients treated with ICIs. Though these excluded populations have not been well studied in randomized placebo-controlled trials, we may be able to learn and derive hypotheses from the existing observational data in the literature.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.