Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35687223›Full record

ReviewTargeted oncology2022

When Less May Be Enough: Dose Selection Strategies for Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors Focusing on AntiPD-(L)1 Agents.

Daniel V Araujo, Bruno Uchoa, Juan José Soto-Castillo, Larissa L Furlan, Marc Oliva

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Targeted oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Dose optimization during drug development: whether and when to optimize.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2023
    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.

Daniel V AraujoDepartment of Medical Oncology, Hospital de Base/HB Onco, FUNFARME/FAMERP, Av. Brigadeiro Faria Lima 5544, São José do Rio Preto, SP, Brazil. daniel.araujo@edu.famerp.br.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7013-5408
Bruno UchoaDepartment of Medical Oncology, Hospital de Base/HB Onco, FUNFARME/FAMERP, Av. Brigadeiro Faria Lima 5544, São José do Rio Preto, SP, Brazil.
Juan José Soto-CastilloDepartment of Medical Oncology, Institut Català d'Oncologia (ICO), L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, Av. Gran Via de L'Hospitalet 199-203, 08908, Barcelona, Spain.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9630-4233
Larissa L FurlanDepartment of Medical Oncology, Hospital de Base/HB Onco, FUNFARME/FAMERP, Av. Brigadeiro Faria Lima 5544, São José do Rio Preto, SP, Brazil.
Marc OlivaDepartment of Medical Oncology, Institut Català d'Oncologia (ICO), L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, Av. Gran Via de L'Hospitalet 199-203, 08908, Barcelona, Spain. moliva@iconcologia.net.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5352-8130

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Early clinical trials investigating antiPD(L)-1 agents rarely reached a maximum tolerated dose (MTD), and efficacy signals were observed even at the lowest dose levels. Most extended treatment intervals investigated indicated that these drugs do not follow a direct dose-toxicity or dose-efficacy relationship. Within this context and considering the high cost of antiPD(L)-1 agents, there is a significant debate on whether lower doses or the administration of such agents at an extended interval should be prospectively evaluated in already-approved agents, or at least be considered in novel combination trials involving antiPD(L)-1 drugs. Herein, we review the dosing, overall response rates, and incidence of treatment-related adverse events of antiPD(L)-1 agents in early dose-escalation trials and discuss the appropriateness of recommended Phase 2 dose selection as well as the final regulatory approved doses of such agents. Efficacy and safety data from randomized dose-range Phase 2 trials and real-world data (RWD) on the usage of lower doses and/or non-standard extended treatment intervals are also examined. As the accumulating evidence suggests lower doses or extended dosing intervals of antiPD(L)-1 may achieve a similar clinical benefit in comparison to the currently approved doses, we address the clinical and financial toxicity implications of using potentially higher doses than necessary. Last, we discuss ways to resolve the current dosing conundrum of antiPD-(L)1 agents such as performing near-equivalence studies and propose a framework for future development of immunotherapeutics to find the lowest efficacious dose instead of MTD.

Indexed as

Immune Checkpoint InhibitorsHumansMaximum Tolerated DoseImmune Checkpoint Inhibitors

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.