Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 571

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 23 of the 23 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The Next Immune-Checkpoint Inhibitors: PD-1/PD-L1 Blockade in Melanoma

Open access
Mahoney, Kathleen M., Freeman, Gordon J., McDermott, David F.·2015·Clinical Therapeutics
DOI 10.1016/j.clinthera.2015.02.018
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Purpose Blocking the interaction between the programmed cell death (PD)-1 protein and one of its ligands, PD-L1, has been reported to have impressive antitumor responses. Therapeutics targeting this pathway are currently in clinical trials. Pembrolizumab and nivolumab are the first of this anti-PD-1 pathway family of checkpoint inhibitors to gain accelerated approval from the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the treatment of ipilimumab-refractory melanoma. Nivolumab has been associated with improved overall survival compared with dacarbazine in patients with previously untreated wild-type serine/threonine-protein kinase B-raf proto-oncogene BRAF melanoma. Although the most mature data are in the treatment of melanoma, the FDA has granted approval of nivolumab for squamous cell lung cancer and the breakthrough therapy designation to immune-checkpoint inhibitors for use in other cancers: nivolumab, an anti-PD-1 monoclonal antibody, for Hodgkin lymphoma, and MPDL-3280A, an anti-PD-L1 monoclonal antibody, for bladder cancer and non–small cell lung cancer. Here we review the literature on PD-1 and PD-L1 blockade and focus on the reported clinical studies that have included patients with melanoma. Methods PubMed was searched to identify relevant clinical studies of PD-1/PD-L1–targeted therapies in melanoma. A review of data from the current trials on clinicaltrial.gov was incorporated, as well as data presented in abstracts at the 2014 annual meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, given the limited number of published clinical trials on this topic. Findings The anti-PD-1 and anti-PD-L1 agents have been reported to have impressive antitumor effects in several malignancies, including melanoma. The greatest clinical activity in unselected patients has been seen in melanoma. Tumor expression of PD-L1 is a suggestive, but inadequate, biomarker predictive of response to immune-checkpoint blockade. However, tumors expressing little or no PD-L1 are less likely to respond to PD-1 pathway blockade. Combination checkpoint blockade with PD-1 plus cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen (CTLA)-4 blockade appears to improve response rates in patients who are less likely to respond to single-checkpoint blockade. Toxicity with PD-1 blocking agents is less than the toxicity with previous immunotherapies (eg, interleukin 2, CTLA-4 blockade). Certain adverse events can be severe and potentially life threatening, but most can be prevented or reversed with close monitoring and appropriate management. Implications This family of immune-checkpoint inhibitors benefits not only patients with metastatic melanoma but also those with historically less responsive tumor types. Although a subset of patients responds to single-agent blockade, the initial trial of checkpoint-inhibitor combinations has reported a potential to improve response rates. Combination therapies appear to be a means of increasing response rates, albeit with increased immune-related adverse events. As these treatments become available to patients, education regarding the recognition and management of immune-related effects of immune-checkpoint blockade will be essential for maximizing clinical benefit.

Overview

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 · 10.1016/j.clinthera.2015.02.018

Cites

23 of 23 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Cited by

See all 571

Metadata

Authors
Mahoney, K. M., Freeman, G. J., & McDermott, D. F.
Venue
Clinical Therapeutics
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2015-04
Volume
37
Issue
4
Pages
764-782
ISSN
0149-2918 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.clinthera.2015.02.018
OpenAlex
W1975992327
Cited by
571
References
23
FWCI
26.91
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.