Research Trends in Immune Checkpoint Blockade for Melanoma: Visualization and Bibliometric Analysis.
bibliometric
cancer
dermatology
immune checkpoint blockade
melanoma
research trends
Journal
Journal of medical Internet research
ISSN: 1438-8871
Titre abrégé: J Med Internet Res
Pays: Canada
ID NLM: 100959882
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
27 06 2022
27 06 2022
Historique:
received:
07
08
2021
accepted:
26
03
2022
revised:
13
12
2021
entrez:
27
6
2022
pubmed:
28
6
2022
medline:
30
6
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Melanoma is one of the most life-threatening skin cancers; immune checkpoint blockade is widely used in the treatment of melanoma because of its remarkable efficacy. This study aimed to conduct a comprehensive bibliometric analysis of research conducted in recent decades on immune checkpoint blockade for melanoma, while exploring research trends and public interest in this topic. We summarized the articles in the Web of Science Core Collection on immune checkpoint blockade for melanoma in each year from 1999 to 2020. The R package bibliometrix was used for data extraction and visualization of the distribution of publication year and the top 10 core authors. Keyword citation burst analysis and cocitation networks were calculated with CiteSpace. A Gunn online world map was used to evaluate distribution by country and region. Ranking was performed using the Standard Competition Ranking method. Coauthorship analysis and co-occurrence were analyzed and visualized with VOSviewer. After removing duplicates, a total of 9169 publications were included. The distribution of publications by year showed that the number of publications rose sharply from 2015 onwards and either reached a peak in 2020 or has yet to reach a peak. The geographical distribution indicated that there was a large gap between the number of publications in the United States and other countries. The coauthorship analysis showed that the 149 top institutions were grouped into 8 clusters, each covering approximately a single country, suggesting that international cooperation among institutions should be strengthened. The core author extraction revealed changes in the most prolific authors. The keyword analysis revealed clustering and top citation bursts. The cocitation analysis of references from 2010 to 2020 revealed the number of citations and the centrality of the top articles. This study revealed trends in research and public interest in immune checkpoint blockade for melanoma. Our findings suggest that the field is growing rapidly, has several core authors, and that the United States is taking the lead position. Moreover, cooperation between countries should be strengthened, and future research hot spots might focus on deeper exploration of drug mechanisms, prediction of treatment efficacy, prediction of adverse events, and new modes of administration, such as combination therapy, which may pave the way for further research.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Melanoma is one of the most life-threatening skin cancers; immune checkpoint blockade is widely used in the treatment of melanoma because of its remarkable efficacy.
OBJECTIVE
This study aimed to conduct a comprehensive bibliometric analysis of research conducted in recent decades on immune checkpoint blockade for melanoma, while exploring research trends and public interest in this topic.
METHODS
We summarized the articles in the Web of Science Core Collection on immune checkpoint blockade for melanoma in each year from 1999 to 2020. The R package bibliometrix was used for data extraction and visualization of the distribution of publication year and the top 10 core authors. Keyword citation burst analysis and cocitation networks were calculated with CiteSpace. A Gunn online world map was used to evaluate distribution by country and region. Ranking was performed using the Standard Competition Ranking method. Coauthorship analysis and co-occurrence were analyzed and visualized with VOSviewer.
RESULTS
After removing duplicates, a total of 9169 publications were included. The distribution of publications by year showed that the number of publications rose sharply from 2015 onwards and either reached a peak in 2020 or has yet to reach a peak. The geographical distribution indicated that there was a large gap between the number of publications in the United States and other countries. The coauthorship analysis showed that the 149 top institutions were grouped into 8 clusters, each covering approximately a single country, suggesting that international cooperation among institutions should be strengthened. The core author extraction revealed changes in the most prolific authors. The keyword analysis revealed clustering and top citation bursts. The cocitation analysis of references from 2010 to 2020 revealed the number of citations and the centrality of the top articles.
CONCLUSIONS
This study revealed trends in research and public interest in immune checkpoint blockade for melanoma. Our findings suggest that the field is growing rapidly, has several core authors, and that the United States is taking the lead position. Moreover, cooperation between countries should be strengthened, and future research hot spots might focus on deeper exploration of drug mechanisms, prediction of treatment efficacy, prediction of adverse events, and new modes of administration, such as combination therapy, which may pave the way for further research.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35759331
pii: v24i6e32728
doi: 10.2196/32728
pmc: PMC9274394
doi:
Substances chimiques
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e32728Informations de copyright
©Yantao Xu, Zixi Jiang, Xinwei Kuang, Xiang Chen, Hong Liu. Originally published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (https://www.jmir.org), 27.06.2022.
Références
Clin Cancer Res. 2008 Aug 15;14(16):5242-9
pubmed: 18698043
N Engl J Med. 2010 Aug 19;363(8):711-23
pubmed: 20525992
JAMA Oncol. 2018 Nov 1;4(11):1553-1568
pubmed: 29860482
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2003 Apr 15;100(8):4712-7
pubmed: 12682289
Science. 2013 Dec 20;342(6165):1432-3
pubmed: 24357284
Drugs. 2014 Oct;74(16):1973-1981
pubmed: 25331768
J Clin Oncol. 2022 Jan 10;40(2):127-137
pubmed: 34818112
Nature. 1987 Jul 16-22;328(6127):267-70
pubmed: 3496540
N Engl J Med. 2015 Jun 25;372(26):2521-32
pubmed: 25891173
J Clin Oncol. 2021 Feb 20;39(6):599-607
pubmed: 33125309
Clin Cancer Res. 2009 Jan 1;15(1):390-9
pubmed: 19118070
J Clin Oncol. 2021 Aug 20;39(24):2647-2655
pubmed: 33945288
Cancer. 2015 Jun 15;121(12):2063-71
pubmed: 25739496
N Engl J Med. 2012 Jun 28;366(26):2455-65
pubmed: 22658128
J Hematol Oncol. 2017 Jan 25;10(1):34
pubmed: 28122590
Ann Oncol. 2013 Jul;24(7):1813-1821
pubmed: 23535954
Int Immunopharmacol. 2019 Jul;72:374-384
pubmed: 31030093
J Clin Oncol. 2012 Jun 10;30(17):2046-54
pubmed: 22547592
N Engl J Med. 2012 Jun 28;366(26):2443-54
pubmed: 22658127
N Engl J Med. 2015 Jan 22;372(4):320-30
pubmed: 25399552
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2003 Jul 8;100(14):8372-7
pubmed: 12826605
N Engl J Med. 2016 Nov 10;375(19):1823-1833
pubmed: 27718847
J Clin Oncol. 2005 Feb 1;23(4):741-50
pubmed: 15613700
J Med Libr Assoc. 2015 Oct;103(4):217-8
pubmed: 26512226
Nature. 2014 Nov 27;515(7528):568-71
pubmed: 25428505
J Clin Oncol. 2005 Sep 1;23(25):6043-53
pubmed: 16087944
Cancer. 2020 May 15;126(10):2225-2249
pubmed: 32162336
Crit Care Med. 2016 Feb;44(2):390-438
pubmed: 26771786
Drugs. 2016 Aug;76(12):1227-32
pubmed: 27412122
N Engl J Med. 2015 Jul 2;373(1):23-34
pubmed: 26027431
Nat Rev Immunol. 2020 Nov;20(11):651-668
pubmed: 32433532
Nat Rev Cancer. 2012 Mar 22;12(4):252-64
pubmed: 22437870
Nature. 2013 Aug 22;500(7463):415-21
pubmed: 23945592
J Transl Med. 2008 May 01;6:22
pubmed: 18452610
Clin Cancer Res. 2010 Jul 1;16(13):3485-94
pubmed: 20479064
J Invest Dermatol. 2015 Nov;135(11):2657-2665
pubmed: 26270022
Science. 2015 Apr 3;348(6230):56-61
pubmed: 25838373