Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31776691›Full record

ReviewCurrent oncology reports2019

Neurologic Immune-Related Adverse Events Associated with Immune Checkpoint Inhibition.

Peter Chei-Way Pan, Aya Haggiagi

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current oncology reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 38 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
38citing papers in PubMed, 4 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

38 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Update on Toxic Neuropathies.Current treatment options in neurology · 2022
    Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
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

2 authors.

Peter Chei-Way PanDivision of Neuro-Oncology, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, 710 W 168th St, 9th Floor, New York, NY, 10032, USA.
Aya HaggiagiDivision of Neuro-Oncology, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, 710 W 168th St, 9th Floor, New York, NY, 10032, USA. amh2237@cumc.columbia.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewThis review highlights the spectrum of neurologic adverse events seen with use of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), their potential mechanisms, the treatments undertaken, and the clinical outcomes. RECENT

findingsThe advent of ICIs has revolutionized cancer therapy. Neurologic adverse events (NAEs) are rare but clinically significant complication of ICIs. They can involve both the central and peripheral nervous system. Examples include myositis, neuropathy, encephalopathy, and myasthenia gravis. Treatment consists of holding the ICI, administration of corticosteroids, and other immunomodulatory agents as needed. The outcomes are generally favorable; however, rarely severe events can lead to significant morbidity and even mortality. Identifying and treating the range of neurologic adverse events that may potentially arise with ICIs is very important as the oncologic indications for their use continues to expand.

Indexed as

Antineoplastic Agents, ImmunologicalHumansImmunotherapyNeoplasmsNervous System DiseasesPrognosisAntineoplastic Agents, ImmunologicalAIDPAnti-CTLA4Anti-PD1Anti-PDL1EncephalitisGuillain-Barre syndromeImmune checkpoint inhibitorImmunotherapyMeningitisMyasthenia gravisNeurologic adverse eventsNeuropathyNeurotoxicityParaneoplastic syndrome

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.