Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37076644›Full record

ReviewJournal of cancer research and clinical oncology2023

Drawbacks of immune checkpoint inhibition and rigorous management for immune-related adverse events along with a mathematical model to assess therapy success and optimum therapy duration and a strategy against tumor plasticity.

C Mehmet Hendekli

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

1 author.

C Mehmet Hendekli, Wien, Austria. hendekli@ieee.org.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeImmune checkpoint inhibition therapy (ICIT) is an emerging field in oncology especially opening new horizons to chemotherapy refractory patients. However, immune-related adverse events (irAEs) and undesired response patterns such as progression after the initial good response in a subset of patients pose a major challenge and drawback to ICIT. This paper provides deep insight into ICIT related bottlenecks and corresponding effective management and combat strategies for very complex complications.

methodsThe relevant literatures from PubMed have been reviewed. Based on obtained information, rigorous and exhaustive analyses have been made to present novel methods and strategies against ICIT drawbacks and bottlenecks.

resultsThe results show that baseline biomarker tests are very crucial to identify suitable candidates for ICIT and frequent assessments throughout ICIT help to recognize possible irAEs at early stages. Equally important are the necessity for mathematical definitions for the ICIT success rate and optimum duration, and the development of combat mechanisms against loss of sensitivity within the tumor microenvironment (TME).

conclusionRigorous management approaches are presented for mostly observed irAEs. Furthermore, for the first time in the literature, a non-linear mathematical model is invented to measure the ICIT success rate and to decide about the optimum ICIT duration. Finally, a strategy against tumor plasticity is introduced.

Indexed as

Cell PlasticityImmune Checkpoint InhibitorsImmune SystemNeoplasmsHumansModels, TheoreticalImmune Checkpoint InhibitorsCTLA-4Immune checkpoint inhibitionImmune-related adverse eventsImmunotherapyOncologyOptimum therapy durationPD-1PD-L1Tumor microenvironmentTumor plasticity

Identifiers

PMID37076644
PMCPMC11798277

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.