ArticleMedical oncology (Northwood, London, England)2019
Correlation between the magnitude of best tumor response and patient survival in nivolumab therapy for metastatic renal cell carcinoma.
Article in Medical oncology (Northwood, London, England), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinical Implications ofInternational journal of medical sciences · 2021Observational
- Article
- Predictive Impact of Peripheral Blood Markers and C-Reactive Protein in Nivolumab Therapy for Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma.Targeted oncology · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The correlation between the magnitudes of best tumor response (bTR) and patient survival in immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) remains unclear. In this article, we retrospectively investigated the prognostic association of the magnitude of bTR in nivolumab therapy for mRCC. Fifty-five patients treated with nivolumab after failure of at least one molecular-targeted therapy were evaluated. Assessment of the magnitude of bTR was based on the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) v.1.1. Endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) after the initiation of nivolumab therapy. In regard to the magnitude of bTR, complete response, partial response, stable disease, and progressive disease were observed in three (5.46%), 15 (27.3%), 19 (34.5%), and 18 (32.7%) patients, respectively. PFS and OS were significantly correlated with the magnitude of bTR (median PFS: not reached (N.R.) [95% confidence interval (CI) 16.8-N.R.] vs. 13.0 [8.38-56.0] vs. 5.95 [4.27-7.30] vs. 1.92 [0.53-3.91] months, p < 0.0001; OS: N.R. [N.R.-N.R.] vs. N.R. [21.4-N.R.] vs. 23.3 [23.3-N.R.] vs. 7.36 [1.41-N.R.] months, p < 0.0001). In addition, multivariate analyses show that the magnitude of bTR was an independent factor for PFS (p < 0.0001) and OS (p = 0.0010). In conclusion, this retrospective study shows the significant correlation between the magnitude of bTR and patient survival in nivolumab therapy for mRCC. The magnitude of bTR can be an effective surrogate marker for survival.
Indexed as
Identifiers
30879157What 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.