ArticleFrontiers in oncology2025
Cyclophosphamide for anticancer therapy-induced interstitial lung disease in the modern era: a retrospective cohort study.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 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.
- Immunoenhancing Effects of JejuPharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Cyclophosphamide for severe T-DXd-induced interstitial lung disease in low-HER2 breast cancer: a case report and mechanistic insights.Frontiers in oncology · 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Drug-induced interstitial lung disease (DIILD) is a serious complication of cancer treatment that is primarily treated with corticosteroids. However, effective standardized regimens for corticosteroid-refractory DIILD have not been established. Cyclophosphamide (CPA) is an immunosuppressant that is potentially effective against DIILD, but supporting evidence is limited, particularly for diseases induced by novel chemotherapeutic drugs. In this study, we examined the efficacy and safety of CPA in corticosteroid-refractory DIILD caused by various anticancer drugs. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of patients who underwent CPA therapy for corticosteroid-refractory DIILD at the National Cancer Center Hospital East between January 2013 and October 2023. Corticosteroid-refractory DIILD was defined as cases of DIILD classified as grade ≥3 according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) version 5.0, in which no improvement was observed within 48 hours after initiating corticosteroid therapy. The primary endpoint was 30-day survival post-CPA. The secondary endpoints included radiological improvements and changes in oxygen supplementation. Results: Fifteen patients (median age 73 years; 80% male) were included in the analysis. Patients were classified into molecular-targeted drugs (MT; 20%, 3/15), MT + cytotoxic drugs (33%, 5/15), immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) ± cytotoxic drugs (27%, 4/15), and cytotoxic drugs alone (20%, 3/15) groups. The overall 30-day survival rate was 47% (7/15). Improvement of oxygen demand allowed 20% (3/15) of patients to discontinue oxygen supplementation. CPA demonstrated drug class-dependent efficacy: highest in the MT group (67% survival, 2/3), less benefit in the cytotoxic drugs alone group (0% survival, 0/3). Adverse events included grade 3 anemia (n=2), grade 4 neutropenia (n=1), and grade 2 cytomegalovirus infection (n=1), with no treatment-related deaths. Conclusion: CPA exhibited potential efficacy for corticosteroid-refractory DIILD, particularly in patients with MT-induced DIILD, with manageable toxicity. The differential responses based on drug category suggest tailored approaches to DIILD management may be warranted. These findings may contribute to optimizing the management of severe DIILD during cancer treatment.
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.