Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31807489›Full record

ArticleSouth Asian journal of cancer

Hyperprogression after immunotherapy.

Waseem Abbas, Ranga Raju Rao, Swati Popli

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in South Asian journal of cancer. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. 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

3 authors.

Waseem AbbasDepartment of Medical Oncology, MAX Institute of Cancer Care, Shalimarbagh, Delhi, India.
Ranga Raju RaoDepartment of Medical Oncology, MAX Institute of Cancer Care, Shalimarbagh, Delhi, India.
Swati PopliDepartment of Medical Oncology, MAX Institute of Cancer Care, Shalimarbagh, Delhi, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionCheckpoint inhibitors demonstrate very good anticancer effects, and some patients are long-time responders. As our experience to use these drugs increases, we see more and more patients having different kind of side effects which are usually not seen with chemotherapy. We have observed a subset of patients who appear to be "hyper-progressors," with a greatly accelerated rate of tumor growth and clinical deterioration compared to pretherapy, which was also recently reported by Institut Gustave Roussy. MATERIALS AND

methodsMedical records from all patients (

resultsHyperprogressive disease (HPD) was defined as a RECIST progression at the first evaluation and as a ≥2-fold increase of the TGR between the REF and the EXP periods. Of 50 evaluable patients, four patients (8%) were considered as having HPD. At progression, patients with HPD had a higher rate of new lesions. HPD was associated with a worse outcome (OS).

conclusionHyperprogression was seen in 4 of 50 (8%) of patients, three of which had urothelial cancer and one malignant melanoma, treated with anti-PD-1 or anti-PD-L1 monotherapy. Patients, on immunotherapy, qualifying for hyperprogression had shorted OS. It is important to have a better understanding of hyperprogression on immunotherapy which shall be addressed in the ongoing immunotherapy studies.

Indexed as

Hyperprogression after immunotehrapyhyperprogression with check point inhibitorsimmunotherapy linked to hyperprogression

Identifiers

PMID31807489
PMCPMC6852633

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.