ArticleCancer immunology, immunotherapy : CII2026
Immune classification of advanced melanoma identifies non-responders to anti-PD1 therapy.
Article in Cancer immunology, immunotherapy : CII, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
21 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundImmunotherapy based on anti-PD1 inhibitors has significantly improved survival in advanced melanoma. However, a significant proportion of patients do not benefit, and predicting response to immunotherapy remains an area of unmet need. Our group previously defined an immune signature able to predict response to anti-PD1 inhibitors in this scenario.
methodsIn this study, we analyzed two cohorts of patients with advanced melanoma treated with anti-PD1 inhibitors: the GEM cohort, previously used to validate our immune signature, and Campbell's cohort, which contains data about different immunotherapy schemes. Using the 107 genes that compose our immune signature and consensus clustering, samples were classified as immune-low or immune-high. Then, CIBERSORTx and Ecotyper were used to estimate the proportion of each immune cell type and carcinoma ecotypes in both cohorts.
resultsWe confirmed that the immune-low group includes mostly patients who do not response to anti-PD1 inhibitors. We also studied the distribution of carcinoma ecotypes in the immune-high and immune-low groups defined by our immune classification. Ecotypes CE9 and CE10 clustered in the immune-high group, with good response to treatment. The use of combination immunotherapy improved response rate both in immune-low and immune-high tumors. The immune-high group contained a higher number of CD8 T cells, B memory cells and T follicular helper cells.
conclusionsOur immune-based classification defines an immune-low group of tumors with poor response to anti-PD1 inhibitors. This immune classification is related to carcinoma ecotypes. Finally, a use of a combo scheme improves the rates of response both in immune-high and low groups but in the case of immune-low tumors, our results suggests that a combo treatment approach could be an adequate strategy and should be further explored in these patients. Altogether, our results support the utility of our immune signature in the prediction of response to anti-PD1 inhibitors in advanced melanoma.
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.