MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

EULAR points to consider for the diagnosis and management of rheumatic immune-related adverse events due to cancer immunotherapy with checkpoint inhibitors

2020· article· en· W3018517995 on OpenAlexaff
Marie Kostine, Axel Finckh, Clifton O. Bingham, Karen Visser, Jan Leipe, Hendrik Schulze‐Koops, Ernest Choy, Karolina Benesova, Timothy R. D. J. Radstake, Andrew P. Cope, Olivier Lambotte, Jacques‐Eric Gottenberg, Yves Allenbach, Marianne E Visser, Cindy Rusthoven, Lone Thomasen, Shahin Jamal, Aurélien Marabelle, James Larkin, John B.A.G. Haanen, Leonard H. Calabrese, Xavier Mariette, Thierry Schaeverbeke

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of the Rheumatic Diseases · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer Immunotherapy and Biomarkers
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCilagPharmacyclicsChugai PharmaceuticalLEO PharmaRegeneron PharmaceuticalsGilead SciencesEuropean League Against RheumatismCelgeneBiogenSanofiAmgenPfizerLes Laboratories Pierre FabreAstraZenecaEli Lilly and Company
KeywordsMedicineImmunotherapyCancer immunotherapyAdverse effectCancerIpilimumabImmunologyIntensive care medicineOncologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Rheumatic and musculoskeletal immune-related adverse events (irAEs) are observed in about 10% of patients with cancer receiving checkpoint inhibitors (CPIs). Given the recent emergence of these events and the lack of guidance for rheumatologists addressing them, a European League Against Rheumatism task force was convened to harmonise expert opinion regarding their identification and management. METHODS: First, the group formulated research questions for a systematic literature review. Then, based on literature and using a consensus procedure, 4 overarching principles and 10 points to consider were developed. RESULTS: The overarching principles defined the role of rheumatologists in the management of irAEs, highlighting the shared decision-making process between patients, oncologists and rheumatologists. The points to consider inform rheumatologists on the wide spectrum of musculoskeletal irAEs, not fulfilling usual classification criteria of rheumatic diseases, and their differential diagnoses. Early referral and facilitated access to rheumatologist are recommended, to document the target organ inflammation. Regarding therapeutic, three treatment escalations were defined: (1) local/systemic glucocorticoids if symptoms are not controlled by symptomatic treatment, then tapered to the lowest efficient dose, (2) conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs, in case of inadequate response to glucocorticoids or for steroid sparing and (3) biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs, for severe or refractory irAEs. A warning has been made on severe myositis, a life-threatening situation, requiring high dose of glucocorticoids and close monitoring. For patients with pre-existing rheumatic disease, baseline immunosuppressive regimen should be kept at the lowest efficient dose before starting immunotherapies. CONCLUSION: These statements provide guidance on diagnosis and management of rheumatic irAEs and aim to support future international collaborations.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.102
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.093
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.102
Threshold uncertainty score0.538

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1020.093
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.007
Bibliometrics0.0050.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0070.005
Open science0.0060.008
Research integrity0.0190.010
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.007

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.042
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.277 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations276
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of the Rheumatic DiseasesSame topicCancer Immunotherapy and BiomarkersFrench-language works237,207