Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34211586›Full record

ReviewTherapeutic advances in urology

Second-line treatment in renal cell carcinoma: clinical experience and decision making.

Valentina Guadalupi, Giacomo Cartenì, Roberto Iacovelli, Camillo Porta, Giovanni Pappagallo, Riccardo Ricotta, Giuseppe Procopio

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Therapeutic advances in urology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 25% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Observational
  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

7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Valentina GuadalupiIstituto Nazionale dei Tumori IRCCS Milano, Milano, Lombardia 20133, Italy.
Giacomo CartenìResponsible for Research and Development Kerubin Digital Therapeutic, Italy.
Roberto IacovelliFondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS Roma, Lazio, Italy.
Camillo PortaChair of Oncology Department of Biomedical Sciences and Human Oncology University of Bari 'A. Moro' and Division of Oncology AOU Consorziale Policlinico di Bari Bari, Italy.
Giovanni PappagalloClinical Epidemiologist, Silea (TV), Italy.
Riccardo RicottaRCCS MultiMedica Sesto San Giovanni (MI), Sesto San Giovanni, Lombardia, Italy.
Giuseppe ProcopioIstituto Nazionale dei Tumori IRCCS Milano, Milano, Lombardia, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2498-402X
Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori · ITAgostino Gemelli University Polyclinic · ITMultiMedica · ITUniversity of Bari Aldo Moro · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Currently, conventional treatments for metastatic RCC (mRCC) include immune-based combination regimens and/or targeted therapies, the latter mainly acting on angiogenesis, a key element of the process of tumor growth and spread. Although these agents proved able to improve patients' outcomes, drug resistance and disease progression are still experienced by a substantial number of VEGFR-TKIs-treated mRCC patients. Following the inhibition of the VEGF/VEGFRs axis, two strategies have emerged: either specifically targeting resistance pathways, at the same time continuing to inhibit angiogenesis, or using a completely different approach aimed at re-activating the immune system through the use of inhibitors of specific negative immune checkpoints. These two approaches, practically represented by the use of either cabozantinib or nivolumab, seem to remain a rational therapeutic approach also when first-line immune-based combinations are used. The objective of this study is to design a preferential therapeutic pathway for the second-line treatment of mRCC. The procedure applied in this project was a group discussion, based on the Nominal Group Technique (NGT) method in a meeting session, aimed at defining the therapeutic choice for the second-line treatment of mRCC. The NGT process defined the most relevant parameters that, according to the interviewed panelists, clinicians should consider for the selection of the second-line therapy in the context of advanced renal cell carcinoma of mRCC. The algorithm developed for the treatment selection as a result of this process should thus be considered by clinicians as reference for therapy selection. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: The result of this paper was the definition of an algorithm intended to suggest a preferential therapeutic pathway considering both the outputs of the Nominal Group Technique (NGT) process and the actual clinical practice and the experience of selected panelists. During the NGT process and the discussion phase, panelists defined the most important parameters to be included in the algorithm that are important for the treatment definition. Cabozantinib and nivolumab are identified as the most reasonable therapeutic options for patients progressing after first-line treatment and are the medication options included in the algorithm for therapy selection.

Indexed as

immune checkpoint inhibitorsnominal group techniquesecond-line treatmenttarget metastatic renal cell carcinomatherapytyrosine kinase inhibitors

Identifiers

PMID34211586
PMCPMC8216352
OpenAlexW3175516656

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.