ArticleJournal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology : JEADV2026
Benefit of immune checkpoint inhibitors as adjuvant treatment for acral melanomas.
Article in Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology : JEADV, 2026. 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.
- Benefit of immune checkpoint inhibitors as adjuvant treatment for acral melanomas.Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology : JEADV · 2026Article
- Adjuvant treatment for acral melanoma.Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology : JEADV · 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
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSolar factors play no role in the development of acral melanoma (AM). AM is characterized by low cumulative solar damage (low CSD). Responses to immunotherapy are correlated with mutational load, which, in turn, is correlated with high cumulative sun damage (CSD). This suggests that AM patients may have poor responses to immunotherapy. The clinical benefit and safety profile of adjuvant immunotherapies in AM treatment have not been fully investigated.
objectivesTo investigate whether the use of adjuvant immunotherapy for treating patients with AM in Stages IIb, IIc, III and IV NED (no evidence of disease) improves distant metastasis-free survival.
methodsAmong the 1005 AM patients in the RIC-Mel melanoma database, 64 AM patients who were treated with adjuvant immunotherapy were included in this study. We then calculated a propensity score to make the adjuvant immunotherapy-treated (n = 64) group and the untreated group (n = 64) comparable in all respects.
resultsThe use of adjuvant immunotherapy for treating AM offers no clear benefit in terms of relapse-free survival or distant metastasis-free survival (RFS: HR = 0.84 [0.534, 1.324, 95% CI] and DMFS: HR = 0.94 [0.565, 1.562, 95% CI]). Among the AM patients who received adjuvant immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI), 18.8% experienced severe (Grades 3-4) immune-related adverse events.
conclusionsThe benefit-risk balance must be carefully weighed, including the relapse-free survival (RFS), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) and rate of severe immune-related adverse events (irAE) occurrence. Other therapeutic strategies should be investigated in larger studies to confirm the potential limited clinical benefit of this treatment strategy.
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.