ReviewJournal for immunotherapy of cancer2024
Merkel cell carcinoma refractory to anti-PD(L)1: utility of adding ipilimumab for salvage therapy.
Review in Journal for immunotherapy of cancer, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Merkel Cell Carcinoma: Evolving Therapeutics, Continued Challenges.Head & neck · 2025Review
- Real-world outcomes of patients receiving salvage therapies for immune checkpoint inhibitor-resistant Merkel cell carcinoma: a rationale for future clinical trials.Journal for immunotherapy of cancer · 2025Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
Merkel cell carcinoma (MCC) incidence has risen to approximately 3,000 cases annually in the USA. Although anti-programmed cell death (ligand) 1 (PD-(L)1) agents are now the first-line treatment for advanced MCC, approximately 50% of such patients do not persistently benefit. In PD-(L)1-refractory cases, ipilimumab (anti-cytotoxic T lymphocyte antigen-4) is often added; however, the extent of the clinical benefit of this combination is controversial. We identified one prospective study, three retrospective studies, and three case reports regarding this combination in refractory MCC. The aggregate response rate from retrospective studies was 32% (13 of 41 patients) with 4 complete responses (CR) and 9 partial responses (PR). In the prospective study, the response rate was very similar at 31% (8 of 26 patients; 4 CR, 4 PR). Response durability was highly variable (range 2 to >43 months), with patients achieving CR having greater durability. Immune-related adverse events (irAEs) were ≥grade III in 29% (retrospective cohort, N=41) and 36% (prospective cohort, N=50). While these aggregate data indicate adding ipilimumab should be considered in this setting, many patients with refractory MCC are ineligible due to comorbidities/irAEs, and approximately 70% will not benefit from this regimen. There is thus a significant unmet need in PD-(L)1-refractory MCC and clinical trials in this setting should be encouraged.
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.