Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34989146›Full record

ArticleThoracic cancer2022

Efficacy and predictors of rechallenge with immune checkpoint inhibitors in non-small cell lung cancer.

Yutaka Takahara, Takuya Tanaka, Yoko Ishige, Ikuyo Shionoya, Kouichi Yamamura, Takashi Sakuma, Kazuaki Nishiki, Keisuke Nakase, Masafumi Nojiri, Ryo Kato and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Thoracic cancer, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Rechallenge immunotherapy after immune resistance in patients with advanced thymic carcinoma.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2025
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Current Status in Rechallenge of Immunotherapy.International journal of biological sciences · 2023
    Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. 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

14 authors.

Yutaka TakaharaDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, Kanazawa Medical University, Kahoku-gun, Ishikawa, Japan.ORCID 0000-0001-6863-0074
Takuya TanakaDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, Kanazawa Medical University, Kahoku-gun, Ishikawa, Japan.
Yoko IshigeDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, Kanazawa Medical University, Kahoku-gun, Ishikawa, Japan.
Ikuyo ShionoyaDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, Kanazawa Medical University, Kahoku-gun, Ishikawa, Japan.
Kouichi YamamuraDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, Kanazawa Medical University, Kahoku-gun, Ishikawa, Japan.
Takashi SakumaDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, Kanazawa Medical University, Kahoku-gun, Ishikawa, Japan.
Kazuaki NishikiDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, Kanazawa Medical University, Kahoku-gun, Ishikawa, Japan.
Keisuke NakaseDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, Kanazawa Medical University, Kahoku-gun, Ishikawa, Japan.
Masafumi NojiriDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, Kanazawa Medical University, Kahoku-gun, Ishikawa, Japan.
Ryo KatoDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, Kanazawa Medical University, Kahoku-gun, Ishikawa, Japan.
Shohei ShinomiyaDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, Kanazawa Medical University, Kahoku-gun, Ishikawa, Japan.
Yuki FujimotoDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, Kanazawa Medical University, Kahoku-gun, Ishikawa, Japan.
Taku OikawaDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, Kanazawa Medical University, Kahoku-gun, Ishikawa, Japan.
Shiro MizunoDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, Kanazawa Medical University, Kahoku-gun, Ishikawa, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe efficacy of rechallenge with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients has not yet been fully clarified. This study aimed to identify the clinical characteristics of patients with NSCLC who benefited from rechallenge with ICIs.

methodsWe retrospectively reviewed the clinical records of 24 patients who were diagnosed with NSCLC and rechallenged with ICIs between August 2016 and July 2021.

resultsOf the 24 patients included in the study, 11 were in the responder group (45.8%) and 13 in the nonresponder group (54.2%). The number of patients who used a different ICI from that used in the initial therapy was significantly higher in the responder group than in the nonresponder group (p = 0.006). Multivariate analysis identified lung metastasis and female sex as significant independent risk factors for nonresponse to rechallenge with ICIs. Compared to the nonresponder group, the duration of treatment after rechallenge with ICIs was significantly longer in the responder group (p = 0.016), and there was a trend toward longer overall survival (p = 0.059).

conclusionsPatients with lung cancer who were rechallenged with ICIs and without progressive disease after initial ICI therapy were able to continue ICI therapy for a longer period of time. This may be associated with longer survival. Patients with lung metastases and female patients are more likely to be nonresponsive to rechallenge with ICIs. Administration of a different type of ICI from that used in the initial ICI therapy may result in disease control.

Indexed as

Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell LungLung NeoplasmsFemaleHumansImmune Checkpoint InhibitorsRetrospective StudiesImmune Checkpoint Inhibitorsimmune checkpoint inhibitorslung neoplasmnon-small-cell lung carcinoma

Identifiers

PMID34989146
PMCPMC8841726

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.