MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389494173 · doi:10.14744/ejma.2023.94830

Navigating Neurologic Adverse Events in Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Therapy: Challenges and Strategies

2023· article· en· W4389494173 on OpenAlexaff
Arzu Aldemir Atmaca

Bibliographic record

VenueEurasian Journal of Medical Advances · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBrain Metastases and Treatment
Canadian institutionsHealth Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAdverse effectMedicineImmune systemIntensive care medicineImmunologyPharmacology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

19 th century, following surgeon William Coley's discovery that the insertion of dead bacteria into sarcomas could lead to tumour shrinkage. [1]Since then, various clinical trials have investigated a range of immunotherapy drugs for multiple cancer types.Immunotherapy boosts the immune system's ability to identify tumor-specific antigens by suppressing immune checkpoints, inhibiting immune-suppressing agents, and enhancing immune-mediated killing.To date, several immunotherapy medications have been developed, including tumor vaccines, cellular immunotherapy, immunomodulatory medications that target T-cells, and ICIs.ICIs are monoclonal antibodies that specifically target im-mune checkpoints, including programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1), programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1), and cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 (CTLA-4), which act as critical regulators of the immune system.By targeting these checkpoints, ICIs enable T cells to remain activated, allowing them to attack malignant cells. [2]Eighteen ICIs have been approved for treating different types of cancer by regulatory bodies such as the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the National Medical Products Administration (NMPA) of China, and the European Medicines Agency (EMA).Please refer to Table 1 for details on the approval status, indications, and dates for widely used ICIs.The advancement of immunotherapy has changed cancer treatment.Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are one of the groundbreaking immunotherapies that have offered patients with advanced cancer new optimism by utilizing the immune system's innate ability to fight cancer with amazing success.Nevertheless, this exceptional approach has drawbacks, including the range of immune-related adverse events (irAEs) that can arise due to ICI therapy.IrAEs that impact various parts and systems of the body can be particularly problematic, and can be difficult to identify and manage.Neurological side effects of ICIs are of particular interest, as they may vary from minor sensory issues to possibly fatal neuroinflammatory reactions.The purpose of this review is to elucidate the peculiarities of neurological immune-related adverse events (n-irAEs) associated with ICIs and to provide a complete overview of the various facets of ICI therapy by exploring the mechanisms, clinical manifestations, and management strategies of n-irAEs.Furthermore, it is crucial to emphasize the importance of caution, early recognition, and collaboration between oncologists and neurologists to optimize patient outcomes while overcoming the challenges posed by these enigmatic neurologic complications.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.971
Threshold uncertainty score0.352

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.309 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEurasian Journal of Medical AdvancesSame topicBrain Metastases and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207