Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39072317›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in immunology2024

Real-world evidence study on the early use of cemiplimab in the UK: REACT-CEMI (Real World evidence of advanced CSCC treatment with cemiplimab).

Amarnath Challapalli, Grant Stewart, Heather Shaw, Peter John Davies, Juan Carlos Lopez-Baez, Edward C Ottley, Stephen Kelly

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in immunology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

7 authors.

Amarnath ChallapalliBristol Haematology and Oncology Centre, University Hospitals Bristol and Weston NHS Foundation Trust, Bristol, United Kingdom.
Grant StewartDepartment of Clinical Oncology, Royal Cornwall Hospital, Truro, United Kingdom.
Heather ShawDepartment of Oncology, University College London Hospital and Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Northwood, United Kingdom.
Peter John DaviesOncology Medical Affairs Department, Sanofi-Aventis, Reading, United Kingdom.
Juan Carlos Lopez-BaezOncology Medical Affairs Department, Sanofi-Aventis, Reading, United Kingdom.
Edward C OttleyOPEN Health, London, United Kingdom.
Stephen KellyOncology Medical Affairs Department, Sanofi-Aventis, Reading, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Cemiplimab was licensed in the United Kingdom (UK) in 2019 for the treatment of patients with locally advanced and metastatic CSCC not suitable for curative surgery or radiotherapy (advanced CSCC [aCSCC]). No UK multi-center studies have investigated the real-world experience of cemiplimab post marketing authorization in aCSCC. Methods: This non-interventional retrospective study (10 UK centers) involved data collection from medical records of patients with aCSCC who initiated cemiplimab treatment between 2 July 2019 and 30 November 2020. The study period was a minimum of 12 and a maximum of 36 months post cemiplimab initiation. The primary objective was to describe the real-world clinical effectiveness of cemiplimab (primary outcome: overall response rate [ORR]). Results: Of 105 patients, 70% (n=73/105) were male (median [range] age at index of 78.5 [55.4-93.2] years); most patients (63% [n=50/80]) had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) score of 1 and 62% (n=63/102) had metastatic disease. The ORR within 12 months was 42% (95% confidence interval [CI] 32%-51%) and the disease control rate was 62% (n=65/105). The median (95% CI) real-world progression-free survival and overall survival from index was 8.6 (6.0-18.7) and 21.0 (14.7-25.2) months, respectively. The median (range) number of cemiplimab infusions was 11.0 (1.0-44.0). Eighty-seven percent experienced no cemiplimab treatment interruptions; 13% (n=14/105) interrupted treatment due to immune-related adverse reactions (irARs) (47% [n=9/19] of treatment interruption events). Eighty-five percent (n=89/105) of patients had discontinued cemiplimab treatment by the end of the study; where reasons for discontinuation were recorded, 20% (n=17/87) discontinued due to the completion of their 2-year treatment course. Nineteen percent (n=20/105) of patients experienced irARs. Conclusion: Effectiveness and safety data in this study are broadly similar to previous real-world studies of cemiplimab and the EMPOWER-CSCC1 clinical trial; with our cohort representing a broader population (included immunocompromised and transplant patients). Results support the use of cemiplimab for the treatment of aCSCC in a real-world setting.

Indexed as

Antibodies, Monoclonal, HumanizedCarcinoma, Squamous CellSkin NeoplasmsAgedAged, 80 and overAntineoplastic Agents, ImmunologicalFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm StagingRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeUnited KingdomAntibodies, Monoclonal, HumanizedAntineoplastic Agents, ImmunologicalcemiplimabcemiplimabCSCCreal-worldskin cancerUnited Kingdom

Identifiers

PMID39072317
PMCPMC11272471

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.