Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34507552›Full record

ArticleBMC cancer2021

Adjuvant immunotherapy recommendations for stage III melanoma: physician and nurse interviews.

Ann Livingstone, Kathy Dempsey, Martin R Stockler, Kirsten Howard, Georgina V Long, Matteo S Carlino, Alexander M Menzies, Rachael L Morton

Open access · goldAbstract readMulticenter Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMC cancer, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. 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

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Ann LivingstoneNHMRC Clinical Trials Centre, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia. ann.livingstone@sydney.edu.au.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6836-0382
Kathy DempseyNHMRC Clinical Trials Centre, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4945-0857
Martin R StocklerNHMRC Clinical Trials Centre, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3793-8724
Kirsten HowardSchool of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Georgina V LongMelanoma Institute Australia, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8894-3545
Matteo S CarlinoCentral Clinical School, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Alexander M MenziesCentral Clinical School, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5183-7562
Rachael L MortonNHMRC Clinical Trials Centre, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7834-0572
The University of Sydney · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAdjuvant immunotherapy is revolutionising care for patients with resected stage III and IV melanoma. However, immunotherapy may be associated with toxicity, making treatment decisions complicated. This study aimed to identify factors physicians and nurses considered regarding adjuvant immunotherapy for melanoma.

methodsIn-depth interviews were conducted with physicians (medical oncologists, surgeons and dermatologists) and nurses managing patients with resected stage III melanoma at three Australian tertiary melanoma centres between July 2019 and March 2020. Factors considered regarding adjuvant immunotherapy were explored. Recruitment continued until data saturation and thematic analysis was undertaken.

resultsTwenty-five physicians and nurses, aged 28-68 years, 60% females, including eleven (44%) medical oncologists, eight (32%) surgeons, five (20%) nurses, and one (4%) dermatologist were interviewed. Over half the sample managed five or more new resected stage III patients per month who could be eligible for adjuvant immunotherapy. Three themes about adjuvant immunotherapy recommendations emerged: [1] clinical and patient factors, [2] treatment information provision, and [3] individual physician/nurse factors. Melanoma sub-stage and an individual patient's therapy risk/benefit profile were primary considerations. Secondary factors included uncertainty about adjuvant immunotherapy's effectiveness and their views about treatment burden patients might consider acceptable.

conclusionsPatients' disease sub-stage and their treatment risk versus benefit drove the melanoma health care professionals' adjuvant immunotherapy endorsement. Findings clarify clinician preferences and values, aiding clinical communication with patients and facilitating clinical decision-making about management options for resected stage III melanoma.

Indexed as

ImmunotherapyAdultAge FactorsAttitude of Health PersonnelAustraliaCancer Care FacilitiesClinical Decision-MakingConsultantsCutaneous Malignant MelanomaDermatologistsFemaleHumansMaleMelanomaMiddle AgedNursesDecision makingImmunotherapyInterviewsMelanomaNurse cliniciansPhysiciansProfessional roleSurgeons

Identifiers

PMID34507552
PMCPMC8434723
OpenAlexW3164345676

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.