ReviewCardiovascular diagnosis and therapy2024
Therapeutic agents for steroid-refractory immune checkpoint inhibitor-related myocarditis: a narrative review.
Review in Cardiovascular diagnosis and therapy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- A serum proteomics-based predictive model for steroid-resistant immune checkpoint inhibitor associated myocarditis.Clinical and translational medicine · 2026Article
- Tocilizumab for severe immune checkpoint inhibitor myopathy-myocarditis: acute and long-term outcomes.Journal of neurology · 2026Article
- Immune Profiling Identifies Inflammatory Signatures in Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor-Related Myocarditis.JACC. CardioOncology · 2026Article
- Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor-Induced Concomitant Polyradiculoneuritis and Myocarditis With Positive Anti-Titin Antibodies: A Case Report and Literature Review.Critical care explorations · 2026Review
- Beyond monoclonal antibodies: constraints and the case for alternative PD-1/PD-L1-targeting formats.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Review
- Immune checkpoint inhibitor-induced myocarditis: a comprehensive review with clinical case insights.Archivos peruanos de cardiologia y cirugia cardiovascularArticle
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Objective: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have become one of the cornerstones of current oncology treatment, and immune checkpoint inhibitor-related myocarditis (IRM) is the most fatal of all immune checkpoint inhibitor-related adverse events (irAEs). Methylprednisolone pulse therapy (500-1,000 mg/day) is the initial treatment for IRM recommended by almost all relevant guidelines. However, subsequent treatment regimens remain unclear for patients who do not respond to methylprednisolone pulse therapy (who are defined as steroid-refractory patients). We propose a potential treatment approach for steroid-refractory IRM. Methods: The PubMed and the Cochrane Library databases were searched using keywords related to IRM. Relevant English-language articles published from January 2000 to February 2024 were included in this narrative review. Key Content and Findings: Abatacept is the preferred choice for the treatment of isolated steroid-refractory IRM. For rapidly progressive or interleukin-6 abnormally elevated steroid-refractory IRM, alemtuzumab or tocilizumab/tofacitinib are the preferred therapeutic agents, respectively. For steroid-refractory IRM comorbid with myositis or comorbid with myasthenia gravis, abatacept + ruxolitinib/mycophenolate mofetil (MMF)/intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG), or MMF + pyridostigmine/IVIG are the preferred therapeutic agents, respectively. Conclusions: The pathogenesis of steroid-refractory IRM and the treatment regimen remain unclear. A large number of studies need to be conducted to validate or update our proposed treatment approach.
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.