Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30815848›Full record

ReviewClinical pharmacokinetics2019

Clinical Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors.

Maddalena Centanni, Dirk Jan A R Moes, Iñaki F Trocóniz, Joseph Ciccolini, J G Coen van Hasselt

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Clinical pharmacokinetics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 201 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
201citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
–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

201 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Exposure-Response Analyses of Tremelimumab Monotherapy or in Combination with Durvalumab in Patients with Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma.Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research · 2023
    Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Article
  16. The Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors Journey: From Early Promise to Lasting Impact.Journal of immunotherapy and precision oncology · 2026
    Review
  17. Resistance to Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Treatment in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Clinical Trials: A Perspective From Lung-MAP Investigators.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2026
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review

141 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

5 authors.

Maddalena CentanniDivision of Systems Biomedicine and Pharmacology, Leiden Academic Centre for Drug Research, Leiden University, Einsteinweg 55, 2333 CC, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Dirk Jan A R MoesDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy and Toxicology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Iñaki F TrocónizPharmacometrics and Systems Pharmacology, Department of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Technology, School of Pharmacy and Nutrition, University of Navarra, Pamplona, Spain.
Joseph CiccoliniSMARTc, CRCM Inserm U1068 Aix Marseille Univ and La Timone University Hospital of Marseille, Marseille, France.
J G Coen van HasseltDivision of Systems Biomedicine and Pharmacology, Leiden Academic Centre for Drug Research, Leiden University, Einsteinweg 55, 2333 CC, Leiden, The Netherlands. coen.vanhasselt@lacdr.leidenuniv.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1664-7314

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have demonstrated significant clinical impact in improving overall survival of several malignancies associated with poor outcomes; however, only 20-40% of patients will show long-lasting survival. Further clarification of factors related to treatment response can support improvements in clinical outcome and guide the development of novel immune checkpoint therapies. In this article, we have provided an overview of the pharmacokinetic (PK) aspects related to current ICIs, which include target-mediated drug disposition and time-varying drug clearance. In response to the variation in treatment exposure of ICIs and the significant healthcare costs associated with these agents, arguments for both dose individualization and generalization are provided. We address important issues related to the efficacy and safety, the pharmacodynamics (PD), of ICIs, including exposure-response relationships related to clinical outcome. The unique PK and PD aspects of ICIs give rise to issues of confounding and suboptimal surrogate endpoints that complicate interpretation of exposure-response analysis. Biomarkers to identify patients benefiting from treatment with ICIs have been brought forward. However, validated biomarkers to monitor treatment response are currently lacking.

Indexed as

AnimalsAntibodies, MonoclonalAntineoplastic Agents, ImmunologicalDose-Response Relationship, DrugDose-Response Relationship, ImmunologicHumansNeoplasmsTreatment OutcomeAntibodies, MonoclonalAntineoplastic Agents, Immunological

Identifiers

PMID30815848
PMCPMC6584248

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.