Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35230439›Full record

Trial reportJAMA network open2022

Association of Plasma Epstein-Barr Virus DNA With Outcomes for Patients With Recurrent or Metastatic Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma Receiving Anti-Programmed Cell Death 1 Immunotherapy.

Jian-Ying Xu, Xiao-Li Wei, Chao Ren, Yang Zhang, Yao-Fang Hu, Jia-Yu Li, Jun-Liang Chen, Yi-Qin Wang, Fei Han, Feng-Hua Wang

Open access · goldAbstract readClinical Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in JAMA network open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
6.3field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

36 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 64 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Targeting the LMP1-ALIX axis in EBVCancer communications (London, England) · 2024
    Article
  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

10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Jian-Ying XuDepartment of Medical Oncology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, China.
Xiao-Li WeiDepartment of Medical Oncology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, China.
Chao RenDepartment of Medical Oncology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, China.
Yang ZhangDepartment of Clinical Research, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, China.
Yao-Fang HuDepartment of Oncology, the Air Force Hospital of Southern Theater Command, Guangzhou, China.
Jia-Yu LiDepartment of Medical Oncology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, China.
Jun-Liang ChenDepartment of Medical Oncology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, China.
Yi-Qin WangDepartment of Clinical Medicine, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China.
Fei HanDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, China.
Feng-Hua WangDepartment of Medical Oncology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, China.
Sun Yat-sen University · CNSun Yat-sen University Cancer Center · CNState Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

importanceAnti-programmed cell death 1 (anti-PD-1) immunotherapy features a durable response and improved survival in a small subset of patients with recurrent or metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma (RM-NPC). The association between plasma Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) DNA titer dynamics and efficacy of anti-PD-1 monotherapy has been reported, while its value in predicting long-term outcomes and monitoring disease progression is unclear for patients with RM-NPC who are receiving anti-PD-1 monotherapy.

objectiveTo evaluate the role of plasma EBV DNA titers in prognosis prediction and surveillance of disease progression for patients with RM-NPC who are receiving anti-PD-1 monotherapy. DESIGN, SETTING, AND

participantsPatients with RM-NPC from the POLARIS-02 prospective clinical trial, the largest cohort to receive anti-PD-1 monotherapy, were included in this study. From December 22, 2016, to February 19, 2019, 17 participating centers in China screened 279 patients with RM-NPC; 190 patients were enrolled and followed up until February 19, 2020. Plasma EBV DNA was detected before treatment and every 4 weeks until disease progression. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Plasma EBV DNA as a predictor for progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), durable clinical benefit (defined as PFS of ≥6 months), and disease progression.

resultsOf 179 patients with RM-NPC receiving anti-PD-1 therapy, 148 (82.7%) were men, and the median age was 46 years (range, 22-71 years). A higher baseline EBV DNA titer was associated with shorter median OS (hazard ratio, 1.88; 95% CI, 1.22-2.89; P = .004). Patients with a ratio of the EBV DNA titer at week 4 to that at baseline (W4 to baseline ratio) greater than 0.5 had shorter median OS (hazard ratio, 2.18; 95% CI, 1.30-3.65; P < .001) than those with a W4 to baseline ratio of 0.5 or less. Patients with higher baseline EBV DNA titers had a lower durable clinical benefit rate than those with lower baseline EBV DNA titers (19 of 97 [19.6%] vs 27 of 71 [38.0%]; P = .01). Similarly, patients with a W4 to baseline ratio greater than 0.5 had a lower durable clinical benefit rate than those with a W4 to baseline ratio of 0.5 or less (9 of 86 [10.5%] vs 32 of 54 [59.3%]; P < .001). In addition, a significant EBV DNA titer increase was present at a median of 2.6 months (IQR, 0.9-4.5 months) prior to radiographic progression. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: This study of plasma EBV DNA in patients with RM-NPC who are receiving anti-PD-1 monotherapy suggests that plasma EBV DNA could be a useful biomarker for outcomes and monitoring disease progression.

Indexed as

Epstein-Barr Virus InfectionsNasopharyngeal NeoplasmsAdultAgedDisease ProgressionDNA, ViralFemaleHerpesvirus 4, HumanHumansImmunologic FactorsImmunotherapyMaleMiddle AgedNasopharyngeal CarcinomaNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalProspective StudiesDNA, ViralImmunologic Factors

Identifiers

PMID35230439
PMCPMC8889459
OpenAlexW4214707510

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.