Cited by 283Cancer Immunotherapy and BiomarkersCutaneous Melanoma Detection and ManagementEconomic and Financial Impacts of Cancer

Estimation of the Percentage of US Patients With Cancer Who Are Eligible for Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Drugs

Open access
Haslam, Alyson, Gill, Jennifer, Prasad, Vinay·2020·JAMA Network Open

Abstract

This cross-sectional study estimates the percentage of US patients with cancer who are eligible for immune checkpoint inhibitor drugs.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.0423

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The success of ICI therapy is dependent on factors such as the expression of immune checkpoint markers (i.e., PD-L1, CTLA-4 and LAG3) by the tumor cells, the TME, and the infiltration of functional, tumor-killing cytotoxic T cells.

    “as the success of this therapy is dependent on various factors such as the expression of immune checkpoint markers (i.e., PD-L1, CTLA-4 and LAG3) by the tumor cells, the TME and the infiltration of functional, tumor-killing cytotoxic T cells (Bonaventura et al., 2019a; Haslam et al., 2020; Wang et al., 2023).”

    From Microphysiological systems as models for immunologically ‘cold’ tumors (2024) · cites this paper as Haslam et al., 2020

    The Methods section links PD-L1 status to ICI eligibility, noting an approval for PD-L1-positive patients with triple-negative breast cancer and a response-rate difference. It does not address CTLA-4, LAG3, the tumor microenvironment, or infiltration by functional cytotoxic T cells as factors in treatment success. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Haslam, A., Gill, J., & Prasad, V.
Affiliations
  • Oklahoma State University (US)
  • Oregon Health & Science University (US)
Corresponding author
Haslam, Alyson
Venue
JAMA Network Open
Published
2020-03-09
Volume
3
Issue
3
Pages
e200423
ISSN
2574-3805 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3010374810
Cited by
283
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 30 · 2025: 63 · 2024: 55 · 2023: 56 · 2022: 38 · 2021: 31 · 2020: 9
FWCI
12.10
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • JAMA Network Open (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer Immunotherapy and Biomarkers
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cutaneous Melanoma Detection and Management
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Economic and Financial Impacts of Cancer
Keywords
immune checkpoint inhibitors, cancer patients, eligibility, treatment eligibility, immunotherapy
MeSH terms
Antineoplastic Agents, Immunological, Cross-Sectional Studies, Drug Labeling, Eligibility Determination, Humans, Neoplasms, Practice Patterns, Physicians', Product Surveillance, Postmarketing, United States, Patient Selection

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review