ArticleJournal of cancer survivorship : research and practice2025
Return to work after neoadjuvant versus adjuvant immunotherapy in stage III melanoma patients.
Article in Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice, 2025. 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.
- Lessons from neoadjuvant immunotherapy in melanoma: understanding antitumour immunity and tumour escape.Nature reviews. Immunology · 2026Review
- Health-related quality of life and psychosocial outcomes in long-term survivors treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors: a nationwide multicenter study.Frontiers in immunology · 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeNeoadjuvant immunotherapy in stage III melanoma has recently been shown to improve event-free and distant metastasis-free survival compared to adjuvant therapy. Pathologic response allows for subsequent personalization of surgery and omission/application of adjuvant therapy. We addressed the question whether neoadjuvant therapy allows an earlier and more to a more extent return to work in this curatively treated patient population.
methodsIn this single-center retrospective analysis of patients participating at the Netherlands, we interviewed via the telephone 88 stage III melanoma patients treated with neoadjuvant versus adjuvant immunotherapy in regards of their stopping work during therapy, and when returning partially or fully to work.
resultsSix, 12, and 24 months post start of therapy at least partially worked 80% versus 61%, 84% versus 73%, and 91% versus 82% in the neoadjuvant versus adjuvant groups. Full return to work was observed at 6 months in 52% versus 48%, at 1 year in 71% versus 52%, and at 2 years 82% versus 62%, respectively. Return to work (RTW) started in general in both groups after finishing the systemic therapies.
conclusionsOur data suggest that the manner of therapy (neoadjuvant versus adjuvant) and potentially its treatment duration might be major factors influencing the timing and extent of RTW. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: A faster and full RTW is not only of importance for the patient's well-being and QoL, but has also a significant financial impact on patients and their families.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40418504What 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.