A bibliometric analysis of immune-related adverse events in cancer patients and a meta-analysis of immune-related adverse events in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background and Objectives: Immunotherapy has become the standard treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), but it carries a risk of immune-related adverse events (irAEs) that can be life-threatening. This study employs bibliometric analysis to understand global scientific research on irAEs in cancer, focusing on characteristics and areas of interest. Additionally, a meta-analysis provides a comprehensive overview of irAEs in HCC patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI)-based therapies. Methods: We conducted a thorough search of Web of Science Core Collection (WoSCC) publications from 1999 to 2022. R and VOSviewer software were used for analysis. A meta-analysis was performed using data from PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases up to March 22, 2022. Trials with HCC patients reporting irAE incidence were included. Quality assessment followed Cochrane risk of bias, Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS), and Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies (MINORS). We used random-effects or fixed-effects models based on I2 values. Primary outcomes included any-grade irAEs and grade ≥ 3 irAEs. This review and meta-analysis are registered in PROSPERO as CRD42022318885. Results: In bibliometric analysis, we included 2946 papers, showing a consistent rise in annual publications on irAEs in cancer research. Frequent keywords were "nivolumab", "immune checkpoint inhibitor", and "immune-related adverse event". "Hepatocellular carcinoma" emerged as a prominent research focus linked to irAEs. We conducted a comprehensive meta-analysis on irAE incidence in HCC patients, including 29 studies. The overall incidence of any-grade irAEs was 61.0% (95% CI 38.5%-81.3%), and grade ≥ 3 irAEs was 13.2% (95% CI 7.9%-19.6%). Treatment-related mortality occurred in 3.1% (95% CI 0.8%-6.3%), with treatment discontinuation at 10.7% (95% CI 6.3%-16.0%). Reactive cutaneous capillary endothelial proliferation (RCCEP) was the most common any-grade irAE, while elevated aspartate aminotransferase (AST) was the most common grade ≥ 3 irAE. Treatment strategies were independently associated with specific irAEs, as indicated by multivariable analysis. Conclusion: This study provides valuable insights into the current research landscape of irAEs in cancer and ofers a comprehensive overview of irAEs in HCC patients undergoing ICI-based therapy. The relatively high incidence of irAEs and their association with treatment strategies emphasize the need for careful management by clinicians when treating HCC patients. These findings offer significant guidance for optimizing care and treatment for HCC patients.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.027 | 0.098 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.015 | 0.037 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.100 | 0.108 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".