ArticleTranslational vision science & technology2021
Efficacy, Toxicity, and Pharmacokinetics of Intra-Arterial Chemotherapy Versus Intravenous Chemotherapy for Retinoblastoma in Animal Models and Patients.
Article in Translational vision science & technology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Oncolytic Viruses and Immunotherapy for the Treatment of Uveal Melanoma and Retinoblastoma: The Current Landscape and Novel Advances.Biomedicines · 2025Review
- Aqueous VEGF-A Levels as a Liquid Biopsy Biomarker of Retinoblastoma Vitreous Seed Response to Therapy.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2024Article
- Review
- Spotlight on Targeted Chemotherapy in Retinoblastoma: Safety, Efficacy, and Patient Outcomes.OncoTargets and therapy · 2022Review
- Retinal microvasculature observations of fellow eyes after intra-arterial chemotherapy for unilateral retinoblastoma using optical coherence tomography angiography.Frontiers in medicine · 2022Article
- Anemia and Bone Marrow Suppression After Intra-Arterial Chemotherapy in Children With Retinoblastoma: A Retrospective Analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Article
- Treatment of Retinoblastoma: What Is the Latest and What Is the Future.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Review
- Suprachoroidal Injection of Topotecan for Retinoblastoma: A Preclinical Study.Ophthalmology scienceArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Purpose: Through controlled comparative rabbit experiments and parallel patient studies, our purpose was to understand mechanisms underlying differences in efficacy and toxicity between intra-arterial chemotherapy (IAC) and intravenous chemotherapy (IVC). Methods: In rabbits, ocular tissue drug levels were measured following IAC and IVC. Retinal toxicity was assessed using electroretinography, fluorescein angiography, optical coherence tomography (OCT) and OCT angiography. Efficacy to eradicate retinoblastoma orthotopic xenografts was compared. In IAC and IVC patients, we measured blood carboplatin pharmacokinetics and compared efficacy and toxicity. Results: In rabbits receiving IAC, maximum carboplatin levels were 134 times greater in retina (P = 0.01) and 411 times greater in vitreous (P < 0.001), and total carboplatin (area under the curve) was 123 times greater in retina (P = 0.005) and 131 times greater in vitreous (P = 0.02) compared with IVC. Melphalan levels were 12 times greater (P = 0.003) in retina and 26 times greater in vitreous (P < 0.001) for IAC. Blood levels were not different. IAC melphalan (but not IV melphalan or IV carboplatin, etoposide, and vincristine) caused widespread apoptosis in retinoblastoma xenografts but no functional retinal toxicity or cytopenias. In patients, blood levels following IVC were greater (P < 0.001) but, when adjusted for treatment dose, were not statistically different. Per treatment cycle in patients, IVC caused higher rates of anemia (0.32 ± 0.29 vs. 0.01 ± 0.04; P = 0.0086), thrombocytopenia (0.5 ± 0.42 vs. 0.0 ± 0.0; P = 0.0042), and neutropenia (0.58 ± 0.3 vs. 0.31 ± 0.25; P = 0.032) but lower treatment success rates (P = 0.0017). Conclusions: The greater efficacy and lower systemic toxicity with IAC appear to be attributable to the greater ocular-to-systemic drug concentration ratio compared with IVC. Translational Relevance: Provides an overarching hypothesis for a mechanism of efficacy/toxicity to guide future drug development.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.