ArticleJournal of geriatric oncology2022
Association of age with survival in older patients with cutaneous melanoma treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors.
Article in Journal of geriatric oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Systemic Melanoma Therapy in Patients with Pre-Existing Heart Failure: An HF-Centered Decision Framework and Critical Narrative Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Clinical, Dermatoscopic, Histological and Molecular Prognostic and Predictive Factors of Metastatic Melanoma Response to Immunotherapy: A Systematic Review and Drug Class Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in the Treatment of Advanced Melanoma in Older Patients: An Overview of Published Data.Cancers · 2025Review
- Article
- The Role of Salvage Chemotherapy on Survival Outcomes Following Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Therapy in Recurrent and/or Metastatic Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma.In vivo (Athens, Greece)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
introductionSeveral types of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are approved to treat advanced melanoma, but their effectiveness has not been compared in older patients treated outside of a clinical trial. Moreover, evidence suggests that a patient's response to ICI therapy may vary by age and type of ICI. The purpose of this study was to compare survival by ICI type in older patients with melanoma and to investigate treatment effect modification by age. MATERIALS AND
methodsUsing the SEER-Medicare database, we identified patients with cutaneous melanoma (2012-2015) treated with an ICI (CTLA-4, PD-1, or combination CTLA-4 + PD-1 inhibitors). Cox proportional hazards regression was used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for ICI types. We used an interaction term and stratified models to test for treatment effect modification by age.
resultsOf the 1435 patients included in our analysis, 790 (55.1%) received CTLA-4 inhibitors, 512 (35.7%) received PD-1 inhibitors, and 133 (9.3%) were treated with combination ICIs. Median survival ranged from 13.4 months (95%CI: 10.7-16.3) for CTLA-4 inhibitors to 23.5 months (95%CI: 16.2-30.0) for combination ICIs. In multivariable models, the risk of death was lower with PD-1 inhibitors compared to CTLA-4 inhibitors (HR = 0.78, 95%CI: 0.68-0.89). An age*ICI type interaction term was significant (p < 0.001), and survival gains were greater the older age group (≥80) compared to the younger group (65-79). DISCUSSION: In a population-based setting, we identified important differences in survival by ICI type in older patients with melanoma treated with ICIs, with prolonged survival associated with PD-1 inhibitors compared to CTLA-4 inhibitors.
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.