ArticleClinical and translational science2022
Application of a patient-centered reverse translational systems-based approach to understand mechanisms of an adverse drug reaction of immune checkpoint inhibitors.
Article in Clinical and translational science, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Metabolomics and Precision Medicine in Resistant Hypertension: Pathophysiological Insights, Biomarker Discovery, and Translational Strategies.International journal of hypertension · 2026Review
- Rewiring Drug Research and Development through Human Data-Driven Discovery (HDPharmaceutics · 2023Review
- Application of a patient-centered reverse translational systems-based approach to understand mechanisms of an adverse drug reaction of immune checkpoint inhibitors.Clinical and translational science · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Immunotherapy became a key pillar of cancer therapeutics with the approvals of ipilimumab, nivolumab, and pembrolizumab, which inhibit either cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen-4 (CTLA-4) or programmed death-1 (PD-1) that are negative regulators of T-cell activation. However, boosting T-cell activation is often accompanied by autoimmunity, leading to adverse drug reactions (ADRs), including high grade 3-4 colitis and its severe complications whose prevalence may reach 14% for combination checkpoint inhibitors. In this research, we investigated how mechanistic differences between anti-CTLA-4 (ipilimumab) and anti-PD-1 (nivolumab and pembrolizumab) affect colitis, a general class toxicity. The data analytical platform Molecular Health Effect was utilized to map population ADR data from the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Adverse Event Reporting System to chemical and biological databases for hypothesis generation regarding the underlying molecular mechanisms causing colitis. Disproportionality analysis was used to assess the statistical relevance between adverse events of interest and molecular causation. We verified that the anti-CTLA-4 drug is associated with an approximately three-fold higher proportional reporting ratio associated with colitis than those of the anti-PD-1 drugs. The signal of the molecular mechanisms, including signaling pathways of inflammatory cytokines, was statistically insignificant to test the hypothesis that the severer rate of colitis associated with ipilimumab would be due to a greater magnitude of T-cell activation as a result of earlier response of the anti-CTLA-4 drug in the immune response. This patient-centered systems-based approach provides an exploratory process to better understand drug pair adverse events at pathway and target levels through reverse translation from postmarket surveillance safety reports.
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.