Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35033167›Full record

ReviewJournal of hematology & oncology2022

Immune checkpoint-targeted antibodies: a room for dose and schedule optimization?

Christophe Maritaz, Sophie Broutin, Nathalie Chaput, Aurélien Marabelle, Angelo Paci

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of hematology & oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed
–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

26 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Observational
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. 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

5 authors.

Christophe MaritazPharmacology Department, U1030 INSERM, University Paris-Saclay, Gustave Roussy Cancer Campus, Villejuif, France.
Sophie BroutinPharmacology Department, U1030 INSERM, University Paris-Saclay, Gustave Roussy Cancer Campus, Villejuif, France.
Nathalie ChaputLaboratory for Immunomonitoring in Oncology (LIO), Faculty of Pharmacy, University Paris-Saclay, Gustave Roussy Cancer Campus, Villejuif, France.
Aurélien MarabelleDrug Development Unit (DITEP), LRTI U1015 INSERM, Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France.
Angelo PaciPharmacology Department, U1030 INSERM, University Paris-Saclay, Gustave Roussy Cancer Campus, Villejuif, France. angelo.paci@gustaveroussy.fr.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Anti-CTLA-4 and anti-PD-1/PD-L1 immune checkpoint inhibitors are therapeutic monoclonal antibodies that do not target cancer cells but are designed to reactivate or promote antitumor immunity. Dosing and scheduling of these biologics were established according to conventional drug development models, even though the determination of a maximum tolerated dose in the clinic could only be defined for anti-CTLA-4. Given the pharmacology of these monoclonal antibodies, their high interpatient pharmacokinetic variability, the actual clinical benefit as monotherapy that is observed only in a specific subset of patients, and the substantial cost of these treatments, a number of questions arise regarding the selected dose and the dosing interval. This review aims to outline the development of these immunotherapies and considers optimization options that could be used in clinical practice.

Indexed as

AnimalsClinical Trials as TopicDose-Response Relationship, DrugDrug MonitoringHumansImmune Checkpoint InhibitorsMaximum Tolerated DoseNeoplasmsImmune Checkpoint InhibitorsDosing intervalImmunotherapyOncologyPharmacokineticsTherapeutic antibodies

Identifiers

PMID35033167
PMCPMC8760805

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.