Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37874473›Full record

ReviewCurrent oncology reports2023

What Is New in Cutaneous T Cell Lymphoma?

Sarah Morgenroth, Andrea Roggo, Laura Pawlik, Reinhard Dummer, Egle Ramelyte

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Current oncology reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing 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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. 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.

Sarah MorgenrothDepartment of Dermatology, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Andrea RoggoDepartment of Dermatology, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Laura PawlikDepartment of Dermatology, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Reinhard DummerDepartment of Dermatology, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Egle RamelyteDepartment of Dermatology, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland. egle.ramelyte@usz.ch.ORCID 0000-0001-8262-8608

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewThis review focuses on updates in prognosis, pathogenesis, and treatment of cutaneous T cell lymphoma (CTCL). RECENT

findingsCohort studies indicate imaging may be necessary in early-stage CTCL. Risk factors for progression of CTCL have been identified. Interactions between malignant cells and the tumor microenvironment (TME) and the skin microbiome advance the understanding of pathogenesis and tumor cell dissemination. Studies support a hypothesis of circulating malignant tumor cells. MicroRNA (miR) influence tumor progression and prognosis; the IL22-STAT3-CCL20 cascade may be a novel target. IL-4, IL-5, and IL-31 cytokines are relevant for pruritus and could be targets for therapeutic interventions. Systemic therapies, such as JAK inhibitors, targeted antibodies, and checkpoint inhibitors, show promise in advanced stages. Allogenic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation provides a potential curative option for patients. Further investigations of prognosis and translational research are necessary to improve stratification of patients for treatment.

Indexed as

Lymphoma, T-Cell, CutaneousMicroRNAsSkin NeoplasmsCytokinesHumansPrognosisTumor MicroenvironmentCytokinesMicroRNAsCutaneous lymphomaCutaneous T cell lymphomaNon-melanoma skin cancerReview CTCL

Identifiers

PMID37874473
PMCPMC10640416

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.