MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4318478559 · doi:10.1093/ckj/sfad014

Immunotherapy in oncology and the kidneys: a clinical review of the evaluation and management of kidney immune-related adverse events

2023· review· en· W4318478559 on OpenAlex
Avinash Rao Ullur, Gabrielle Côté, Karyne Pelletier, Abhijat Kitchlu

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Kidney Journal · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer Immunotherapy and Biomarkers
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalHôpital du Sacré-Cœur de MontréalUniversité LavalUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineImmunotherapyAdverse effectKidney cancerIntensive care medicineImmune systemOncologyInternal medicineImmunologyRenal cell carcinoma

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) are now widely used in the treatment of many cancers, and currently represent the standard of care for multiple malignancies. These agents enhance the T cell immune response to target cancer tissues, and have demonstrated considerable benefits for cancer outcomes. However, despite these improved outcomes, there are important kidney immune-related adverse events (iRAEs) associated with ICI. Acute tubulo-interstitial nephritis remains the most frequent kidney iRAE, however glomerular lesions and electrolytes disturbances are increasingly being recognized and reported. In this review, we summarize clinical features and identify risk factors for kidney iRAEs, and discuss the current understanding of pathophysiologic mechanisms. We highlight the evidence basis for guideline-recommended management of ICI-related kidney injury as well as gaps in current knowledge. We advocate for judicious use of kidney biopsy to identify ICI-associated kidney injury, and early use of corticosteroid treatment where appropriate. Selected patients may also be candidates for re-challenge with ICI therapy after a kidney iRAE, in view of current data on recurrent rates of kidney injury. Risk of benefits of re-challenge must be considered on an individual considering patient preferences and prognosis. Lastly, we review current knowledge of ICI use in the setting of patients with end-stage kidney disease, including kidney transplant recipients and those receiving dialysis, which suggest that these patients should not be summarily excluded from the potential benefits of these cancer therapies.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.035
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.942
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0350.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.145
GPT teacher head0.502
Teacher spread0.357 · 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