ArticleIJU case reports2022
Efficacy of pembrolizumab rechallenge for metastatic urothelial carcinoma.
Article in IJU case reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Before the approval of enfortumab vedotin, no standard treatment was available as the salvage treatment for patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma who had failed second-line or later pembrolizumab. Pembrolizumab rechallenge is one of the options for these patients, but there is limited evidence on the effectiveness of pembrolizumab rechallenge. We report three patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma treated with pembrolizumab rechallenge and discuss rechallenge of immune checkpoint inhibitors in other malignancies. Case presentation: This study included three cases treated with pembrolizumab rechallenge with the age of 54 (Case 1), 78 (Case 2), and 67 (Case 3) years old. A complete response to the prior pembrolizumab was observed only in Case 1. However, no patients responded to the pembrolizumab rechallenge. Conclusion: Pembrolizumab rechallenge is not recommended in the current clinical setting of metastatic urothelial carcinoma, even for patients who showed complete response to the prior pembrolizumab.
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.