ArticleFrontiers in immunology2024
Re-exposition to ipilimumab plus nivolumab in metastatic Merkel cell carcinoma.
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 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Clinical, Surgical, and Survival Outcomes of Periocular Merkel Cell Carcinoma: A Retrospective Cohort Analysis.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Merkel cell carcinoma (MCC) is a rare but highly aggressive cutaneous malignancy. Immune checkpoint inhibition (ICI) with PD-(L)1 blockade has significantly improved treatment outcomes in metastatic disease. In patients with primary resistance to PD-(L)1 inhibition, a high overall response rate (ORR) of 50% to later-line ipilimumab plus nivolumab (IPI/NIVO) has been demonstrated. However, clinical data on patients with progression after an initial response to IPI/NIVO are still lacking. Methods: Clinical data of three metastatic MCC patients who were re-exposed to IPI/NIVO after progression were retrospectively evaluated. Results: Two of the three patients showed primary resistance to avelumab with progressive disease, while one patient showed complete response (according to RECIST V.1.1). All three patients received combined ICI with IPI/NIVO as subsequent therapy, resulting in an ORR of ∼ 67%. However, all three patients progressed during follow-up and were re-exposed to IPI/NIVO. With a follow-up period ranging from 6.5 to 37.1 months, no PFS event has been detected. ORR for IPI/NIVO re-exposition was equal to that of initial IPI/NIVO treatment. Conclusion: In this retrospective follow-up analysis, we observed a response rate of 67% and long-lasting responses after re-exposition to combined ICI in metastatic MCC patients with progression after initial response or disease control upon their first IPI/NIVO treatment. An important observation from this small analysis is that primary resistance to PD-L1 inhibition may result in a better response to IPI/NIVO.
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.