Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36751659›Full record

ArticleJournal of immunotherapy and precision oncology2023

Predictors of Oncologic Outcome in Patients Receiving Phase I Investigational Therapy for Recurrent or Metastatic Cervical Cancer.

Ji Son, Heather Y Lin, Siqing Fu, Amadeo B Biter, Ecaterina E Dumbrava, Daniel D Karp, Aung Naing, Shubham Pant, Sarina A Piha-Paul, Jordi Rodon and 10 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of immunotherapy and precision oncology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 42% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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

20 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Ji SonDepartment of Gynecologic Oncology and Reproductive Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5130-4763
Heather Y LinDepartment of Biostatistics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA.
Siqing FuDepartment of Investigational Cancer Therapeutics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA.
Amadeo B BiterDepartment of Investigational Cancer Therapeutics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA.
Ecaterina E DumbravaDepartment of Investigational Cancer Therapeutics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA.
Daniel D KarpDepartment of Investigational Cancer Therapeutics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA.
Aung NaingDepartment of Investigational Cancer Therapeutics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA.
Shubham PantDepartment of Investigational Cancer Therapeutics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA.
Sarina A Piha-PaulDepartment of Investigational Cancer Therapeutics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA.
Jordi RodonDepartment of Investigational Cancer Therapeutics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA.
Vivek SubbiahDepartment of Investigational Cancer Therapeutics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA.
Apostolia M TsimberidouDepartment of Investigational Cancer Therapeutics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA.
Timothy A YapDepartment of Investigational Cancer Therapeutics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA.
Michael M FrumovitzDepartment of Gynecologic Oncology and Reproductive Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA.
Amir A JazaeriDepartment of Gynecologic Oncology and Reproductive Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA.
Pedro T RamirezDepartment of Gynecologic Oncology and Reproductive Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA.
Shannon N WestinDepartment of Gynecologic Oncology and Reproductive Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA.
Ying YuanDepartment of Biostatistics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA.
Funda Meric-BernstamDepartment of Investigational Cancer Therapeutics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA.
David S HongDepartment of Investigational Cancer Therapeutics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA.
The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: We aimed to identify clinical, pathologic, and treatment factors that are predictive of response and survival in patients with cervical cancer referred to phase I clinical trials. Methods: Patients with cervical cancer who received at least one dose of a phase I investigational agent at our institution between 2014 and 2022 were included. The log-rank test was used to analyze differences in progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS), and multivariable regression analysis was performed. Results: We included 65 patients with a median age of 41 years (range, 20-74), 3 prior therapies (range, 1-7), and 67.7% squamous carcinoma. The rate of distant metastasis at trial entry was 84.6%. The most common molecular alterations included PIK3CA (46.5%), PD-L1+ (46.2%), EPH (30.0%), and CREBBP (23.1%); 23.1% had received a prior checkpoint inhibitor. Phase I trials were for immunotherapy (58.5%) or targeted therapy (41.5%). The rate of biomarker matching was 21.5%. For all patients, median PFS was 3.6 months (95% CI, 2.0-5.2) and OS was 9.3 months (95% CI, 7.0-10.6). Factors at study entry associated with worse survival were presence of bone metastasis (PFS 1.6 vs 4.4 months: hazard ratio [HR], 2.8; Conclusion: Bone metastasis and absolute lymphocyte count below normal range at phase I study entry portend poor survival in patients with recurrent or metastatic cervical cancer.

Indexed as

lymphopeniametastatic cervical cancerphase I trial prognosisrecurrent cervical cancer

Identifiers

PMID36751659
PMCPMC9888522
OpenAlexW4313888364

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.