Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33687443›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2021

Validation of the American Joint Committee on Cancer Eighth Edition Staging of Patients With Metastatic Cutaneous Melanoma Treated With Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors.

Jessica J Waninger, Vincent T Ma, Sara Journey, Jeremy Skvarce, Zoey Chopra, Alangoya Tezel, Alex K Bryant, Charles Mayo, Yilun Sun, Kamya Sankar and 6 more

Open access · goldAbstract readMulticenter StudyValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. The Liver-Immunity Nexus and Cancer Immunotherapy.Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research · 2022
    Review
  14. Review
  15. 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

16 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Jessica J WaningerUniversity of Michigan Medical School, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Vincent T MaDivision of Hematology Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Sara JourneyUniversity of Michigan Medical School, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Jeremy SkvarceUniversity of Michigan Medical School, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Zoey ChopraUniversity of Michigan Medical School, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Alangoya TezelUniversity of Michigan Medical School, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Alex K BryantDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Charles MayoDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Yilun SunDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Kamya SankarRogel Cancer Center, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Nithya RamnathRogel Cancer Center, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Christopher LaoDivision of Hematology Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Jeremy B SussmanDepartment of Medicine, Veterans Affairs Ann Arbor Healthcare System, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Leslie FecherDivision of Hematology Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Ajjai AlvaDivision of Hematology Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Michael D GreenDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
University of Michigan–Ann Arbor · USVA Ann Arbor Healthcare System · US

Funding

MICHIGAN MEDICAL SCIENTIST TRAINING PROGRAMT32GM007863 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI COLLINS, KATHLEEN L. · 1985 to 2024
$38.3M
NIGMS NIH HHS T32 GM007863
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have transformed the survival of patients with metastatic melanoma. Patient prognosis is reflected by the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging system; however, it is unknown whether the metastatic (M) stage categories for cutaneous melanoma remain informative of prognosis in patients who have received ICIs. Objectives: To evaluate the outcomes of patients with metastatic cutaneous melanoma based on the M stage category from the AJCC eighth edition and to determine whether these designations continue to inform the prognosis of patients who have received ICIs. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study included patients with metastatic cutaneous melanoma who were treated between August 2006 and August 2019 at the University of Michigan. The estimated median follow-up time was 35.5 months. Patient data were collected via the electronic medical record system. Critical findings were externally validated in a multicenter nationwide cohort of patients treated within the Veterans Affairs health care system. Data analysis was conducted from February 2020 to January 2021. Exposures: All patients were treated with dual-agent concurrent ipilimumab and nivolumab followed by maintenance nivolumab or single-agent ipilimumab, nivolumab, or pembrolizumab therapy. Patients were staged using the AJCC eighth edition. Main Outcomes and Measures: Univariable and multivariable analyses were used to assess the prognostic value of predefined clinicopathologic baseline factors on survival. Results: In a discovery cohort of 357 patients (mean [SD] age, 62.6 [14.2] years; 254 [71.1%] men) with metastatic cutaneous melanoma treated with ICIs, the M category in the AJCC eighth edition showed limited prognostic stratification by both univariable and multivariable analyses. The presence of liver metastases and elevated levels of serum lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) offered superior prognostic separation compared with the M category (liver metastases: hazard ratio, 2.22; 95% CI, 1.48-3.33; P < .001; elevated serum LDH: hazard ratio, 1.73; 95% CI, 1.16-2.58; P = .007). An updated staging system based on these factors was externally validated in a cohort of 652 patients (mean [SD] age, 67.9 [11.6] years; 630 [96.6%] men), with patients without liver metastases or elevated LDH levels having the longest survival (median overall survival, 30.7 months). Conclusions and Relevance: This study found that the AJCC eighth edition M category was poorly reflective of prognosis in patients receiving ICIs. Future staging systems could consider emphasizing the presence of liver metastases and elevated LDH levels. Additional studies are needed to confirm the importance of these and other prognostic biomarkers.

Indexed as

AgedCohort StudiesFemaleHumansImmune Checkpoint InhibitorsMaleMelanomaMiddle AgedNeoplasm StagingPrognosisSkin NeoplasmsSurvival RateTreatment OutcomeImmune Checkpoint Inhibitors

Identifiers

PMID33687443
PMCPMC7944385
OpenAlexW3135557710

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.