ArticlePigment cell & melanoma research2022
Retrospective review of outcomes associated with metastatic melanoma patients treated with 1st-line BRAF-targeted therapy.
Article in Pigment cell & melanoma research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Multistep tumor genetic evolution and changes in immunogenicity trigger immune-mediated disease eradication in stage IV melanoma: lessons from a single case.Journal for immunotherapy of cancer · 2024Article
- Retrospective review of outcomes associated with metastatic melanoma patients treated with 1st-line BRAF-targeted therapy.Pigment cell & melanoma research · 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
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BRAF-mutant melanoma patients can theoretically access both immunotherapy and BRAF-targeted therapy as treatment for metastatic disease. BRAF-targeted therapy is increasingly used 1st line for poorer prognostic patients, so we wanted to assess realistic expectations of these patients accessing 2nd-line immunotherapy. We conducted a retrospective review of clinical outcomes in 25 patients treated over the last 3 years with 1st-line BRAF-targeted therapy in a real-world clinical setting at a UK-based tertiary centre. Compared with the registration trials, our patients receiving 1st-line BRAF-targeted therapy had poorer performance status, higher disease burden, shorter median progression-free survival (5.05 months, 95% CI: 3.96-8.88) and shorter median overall survival (11.5 months, 95% CI: 6.24 - not reached). Overall response rate was similar, at 64%. On disease progression, median survival was 2.34 months (95% CI: 1.62 - not reached). Only five patients went on to receive 2nd-line immunotherapy. Metastatic melanoma patients treated with 1st-line BRAF-targeted therapy now have different demographics compared with those recruited to registration trials conducted over the last 10 years. In a modern-day, real-world setting, these patients should be counselled that only 1 in 5 are likely to receive 2nd-line immunotherapy and their survival times are expected to be short.
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.