ArticleFrontiers in immunology2026
Clinical characteristics analysis of immune checkpoint inhibitors-related myocarditis.
Article in Frontiers in immunology, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To investigate the clinical characteristics of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs)-related myocarditis and the differences between mild and severe cases, aiming to provide evidence for early identification and stratified management. Methods: A total of 74 patients diagnosed with ICIs-related myocarditis at our hospital from April 2020 to April 2024 were retrospectively enrolled. According to the *Chinese Expert Consensus on the Surveillance and Management of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor-Related Myocarditis (2020 Edition)* and CTCAE 5.0 criteria, patients were divided into mild group (n=49) and severe group (n=25). The two groups were compared in terms of demographic characteristics, clinical manifestations, laboratory tests, auxiliary examinations, concomitant irAEs, treatment, and outcomes. Results: The time of onset in the severe group was significantly earlier than that in the mild group [23 days (18, 85) vs. 80 days (48, 132), P = 0.004]. Severe group more frequently presented with multisystem involvement: incidences of myasthenia (56.0% vs. 6.1%), dyspnea (24.0% vs. 0), and ptosis (16.0% vs. 0) were significantly higher (all P<0.05). Levels of cardiac biomarkers (cTnT/I, CK, NT-proBNP) and liver enzymes (ALT, AST) were markedly elevated (all P<0.01). Electrocardiographic ST-T segment changes (56.0% vs. 10.2%) and conduction blocks (32.0% vs. 4.1%) were more common in the severe group. Echocardiography showed higher rates of regional wall motion abnormality (28.0% vs. 6.1%) and pericardial effusion (28.0% vs. 6.1%) in the severe group. The severe group also had higher rates of concomitant myositis (68.0% vs. 40.8%), hepatitis (28.0% vs. 6.1%), and neurotoxicity (32.0% vs. 2.0%) (all P<0.05). Regarding treatment, 100% of the severe group received glucocorticoids (vs. 28.6%), 60.0% required intravenous immunoglobulin, and 28.0% needed respiratory support. Regarding outcomes, all patients in the mild group improved, while the mortality rate in the severe group was 32.0% (8/25). Conclusion: Patients with severe ICIs-related myocarditis are characterized by early onset, multisystem involvement, marked elevation of cardiac enzymes, prominent electrocardiographic/echocardiographic abnormalities, frequent concomitant irAEs, and high mortality. Clinicians should be highly vigilant for patients presenting with early myasthenia, conduction blocks, or markedly elevated CK/cTn, and promptly initiate intensified immunosuppressive therapy to improve prognosis.
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.