-
Medicine Sep 2023High-risk proliferative diabetic retinopathy (HR-PDR) is the advanced stage of diabetic retinopathy progression with poor prior treatment efficacy and high rates of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Efficacy and safety of pan retinal photocoagulation combined with intravitreal anti-VEGF agents for high-risk proliferative diabetic retinopathy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
High-risk proliferative diabetic retinopathy (HR-PDR) is the advanced stage of diabetic retinopathy progression with poor prior treatment efficacy and high rates of blindness. This meta-analysis aims to compare the efficacy and safety of pan retinal photocoagulation (PRP) combined with intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (aVEGF) (PRP + aVEGF) versus PRP monotherapy in HR-PDR patients.
METHODS
A thorough search was performed through PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, and the Cochran Library from inception to December 18, 2022. Outcome measures included change in central macular thickness, best-corrected visual acuity, fluorescein angiography, incidence of undergoing vitrectomy, and adverse events during the follow-up period.
RESULTS
Eight studies (6 randomized controlled trials and 2 retrospective studies) with 375 eyes were included in this meta-analysis. There were no obvious differences in the changes of best-corrected visual acuity and fluorescein angiography between the PRP + aVEGF and PRP monotherapy groups. However, PRP + aVEGF group had a significant reduction in the change of central macula thickness (standard mean deviations = -1.44, 95%CI = -2.55 to -0.32, P = .01) and the rate of undergoing vitrectomy (odds ratio = 0.20, 95%CI = 0.05-0.83, P = .01). Additionally, the risks of vitreous hemorrhage and other complications were not significantly different between the 2 groups.
CONCLUSION SUBSECTIONS
Our meta-analysis indicated that PRP + aVEGF might have potential benefits in the treatment of HR-PDR patients. However, given several limitations of this study, more research is needed to confirm our findings.
Topics: Humans; Angiogenesis Inhibitors; Diabetes Mellitus; Diabetic Retinopathy; Intravitreal Injections; Laser Coagulation; Retrospective Studies; Vascular Endothelial Growth Factors
PubMed: 37773800
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000034856 -
Current Oncology (Toronto, Ont.) Sep 2023Serous epithelial ovarian cancer, classified as either high-grade (90%) or low-grade (10%), varies in molecular, histological, and clinicopathological presentation.... (Review)
Review
Serous epithelial ovarian cancer, classified as either high-grade (90%) or low-grade (10%), varies in molecular, histological, and clinicopathological presentation. Low-grade serous ovarian cancer (LGSOC) is a rare histologic subtype that lacks disease-specific evidence-based treatment regimens. However, LGSOC is relatively chemo-resistant and has a poor response to traditional treatments. Alternative treatments, including biologic therapies such as bevacizumab, have shown some activity in LGSOC. Thus, the objective of this systematic review is to determine the effect and safety of bevacizumab in the treatment of LGSOC. Following PRISMA guidelines, Medline ALL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Embase all from the OvidSP platform, ClinicalTrials.gov, International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number Registry were searched from inception to February 2022. Articles describing bevacizumab use in patients with LGSOC were included. Article screening, data extraction, and critical appraisal of included studies were completed by two independent reviewers. The effect of bevacizumab on the overall response rate, progression-free survival, overall survival, and adverse effects were summarized. The literature search identified 3064 articles, 6 of which were included in this study. A total of 153 patients were analyzed; the majority had stage IIIC cancer (56.2%). The overall median response rate reported in the studies was 47.5%. Overall, bevacizumab is a promising treatment for LGSOC, with response rates higher than traditional treatment modalities such as conventional chemotherapy, and is often overlooked as a treatment tool. A prospective clinical trial evaluating the use of bevacizumab in LGSOC is necessary to provide greater evidence and support these findings.
Topics: Humans; Female; Bevacizumab; Prospective Studies; Carcinoma, Ovarian Epithelial; Cystadenocarcinoma, Serous; Peritoneal Neoplasms; Ovarian Neoplasms
PubMed: 37754507
DOI: 10.3390/curroncol30090592 -
Advances in Therapy Dec 2023A systematic literature review (SLR) and network meta-analysis (NMA) were conducted to evaluate the comparative efficacy, durability and safety of faricimab, used in a... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
A systematic literature review (SLR) and network meta-analysis (NMA) were conducted to evaluate the comparative efficacy, durability and safety of faricimab, used in a Treat & Extend (T&E) regime with intervals up to every 16 weeks (Q16W), relative to other therapies currently in use for treatment of diabetic macular oedema (DME). Of particular interest were anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) therapies applied in flexible dosing regimens such as Pro re nata (PRN) and T&E, which are the mainstay in clinical practice.
METHODS
An SLR identifying randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published before August 2021 was conducted, followed by a Bayesian NMA comparing faricimab T&E treatment to aflibercept, ranibizumab, bevacizumab, dexamethasone and laser therapy. Outcomes included in the analysis were change in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), change in central subfield thickness (CST), injection frequency, ocular adverse events (AE) and all-cause discontinuation, all of which were evaluated at 12 months. Subgroup analyses including patients' naïve to anti-VEGF were conducted where feasible.
RESULTS
Twenty-six studies identified in the SLR were included in the NMA. Most importantly for decision making in clinical practise, faricimab T&E was associated with a statistically greater (95% credible intervals exclude zero) and clinically meaningful decrease in retinal thickness compared to all other flexible dosing regimens (greater retinal drying by 55-125 microns). Anatomical outcomes determine treatment efficacy and retreatment of patients. The NMA also showed a statistically greater increase in mean change in BCVA for faricimab T&E vs. flexible regimens using ranibizumab and bevacizumab (increase of 4.4-4.8 letters) as well as a numerical improvement vs. aflibercept PRN (two letters, 95% credible intervals including zero). Accordingly, the injection frequency was numerically lower versus other treatments using flexible dosing regimens (decrease by 0.92-1.43 injections). The analyses also indicated that the safety profile of faricimab T&E was comparable to those of ranibizumab and aflibercept, which have well-established safety profiles, with similar results for the number of all-cause discontinuations.
CONCLUSION
Faricimab provides a new treatment option in DME with dual-pathway inhibition of VEGF and angiopoeitin-2 (Ang-2). To the authors' knowledge, this is the first indirect comparison of faricimab T&E in DME. The analyses indicate that faricimab T&E is associated with superior retinal drying along with numerically fewer injections compared to all other treatments given in flexible dosing regimens. It also showed superior visual acuity outcomes compared to ranibizumab and bevacizumab.
Topics: Humans; Angiogenesis Inhibitors; Bevacizumab; Diabetic Retinopathy; Intravitreal Injections; Macular Edema; Network Meta-Analysis; Ranibizumab; Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor A
PubMed: 37751021
DOI: 10.1007/s12325-023-02675-y -
Journal of Neuro-oncology Sep 2023This review compares reirradiation (reRT), systemic therapy and combination therapy (reRT & systemic therapy) with regards to overall survival (OS), progression-free... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
PURPOSE
This review compares reirradiation (reRT), systemic therapy and combination therapy (reRT & systemic therapy) with regards to overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), adverse effects (AEs) and quality of life (QoL) in patients with recurrent high-grade glioma (rHGG).
METHODS
A search was performed on PubMed, Scopus, Embase and CENTRAL. Studies reporting OS, PFS, AEs and/or QoL and encompassing the following groups were included; reirradiation vs systemic therapy, combination therapy vs systemic therapy, combination therapy vs reRT, and bevacizumab-based combination therapy vs reRT with/without non-bevacizumab-based systemic therapy. Meta-analyses were performed utilising a random effects model. Certainty of evidence was assessed using GRADE.
RESULTS
Thirty-one studies (three randomised, twenty-eight non-randomised) comprising 2084 participants were included. In the combination therapy vs systemic therapy group, combination therapy improved PFS (HR 0.57 (95% CI 0.41-0.79); low certainty) and OS (HR 0.73 (95% CI 0.56-0.95); low certainty) and there was no difference in grade 3 + AEs (RR 1.03 (95% CI 0.57-1.86); very low certainty). In the combination therapy vs reRT group, combination therapy improved PFS (HR 0.52 (95% CI 0.38-0.72); low certainty) and OS (HR 0.69 (95% CI 0.52-0.93); low certainty). In the bevacizumab-based combination therapy vs reRT with/without non-bevacizumab-based systemic therapy group, adding bevacizumab improved PFS (HR 0.46 (95% CI 0.27-0.77); low certainty) and OS (HR 0.42 (95% CI 0.24-0.72; low certainty) and reduced radionecrosis (RR 0.17 (95% CI 0.06-0.48); low certainty).
CONCLUSIONS
Combination therapy may improve OS and PFS with acceptable toxicities in patients with rHGG compared to reRT or systemic therapy alone. Particularly, combining bevacizumab with reRT prophylactically reduces radionecrosis.
REGISTRATION
CRD42022291741.
Topics: Humans; Bevacizumab; Quality of Life; Re-Irradiation; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local; Glioma; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 37733174
DOI: 10.1007/s11060-023-04441-0 -
RMD Open Sep 2023To estimate the incidence of infections among patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) or axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA), two distinct phenotypes included in the large... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Incidence of infections in patients with psoriatic arthritis and axial spondyloarthritis treated with biological or targeted disease-modifying agents: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials, open-label studies and observational studies.
OBJECTIVE
To estimate the incidence of infections among patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) or axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA), two distinct phenotypes included in the large group of spondyloarthritis (SpA), treated with tumour necrosis-factor-inhibitors, interleukin-17-inhibitors, Janus kinase-inhibitors, IL-23 or IL-12/23-inhibitors (IL-12/23i), phosphodiesterase 4-inhibitors or cytotoxic T-lymphocyte associated protein 4-Ig.
METHODS
A meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs), open-label extension and observational studies was conducted. Serious infections were defined as infections that were life-threatening, required intravenous antibiotics and/or hospitalisation. Non-serious infections did not meet these severity criteria. The incidence rates (IR) were reported for each diagnosis by treatment class and study type using random-effect model to create a 95% CI.
RESULTS
Among 23 333 PsA patients and 11 457 axSpA patients, there were 1.09 serious infections per 100 patient-years (PY) (95% CI 0.85 to 1.35) with similar IR in PsA (0.96 per 100 PY 95% CI 0.69 to 1.28) and axSpA (1.09 per 100 PY 95% CI 0.76 to 1.46). The IR was lower in RCTs (0.77 per 100 PY 95% CI 0.41 to 1.20) compared with observational studies (1.68 per 100 PY 95% CI 1.03 to 2.47). In PsA patients, the lowest IR value was observed with IL-12/23i (0.29 per 100 PY 95% CI 0.00 to 1.03). There were 53.0 non-serious infections per 100 PY (95% CI 43.47 to 63.55) in 7257 PsA patients and 5638 axSpA patients. The IR was higher in RCTs (69.95 per 100 PY 95% CI 61.59 to 78.84) compared with observational studies (15.37 per 100 PY 95% CI 5.11 to 30.97).
CONCLUSION
Serious infections were rare events in RCTs and real-life studies. Non-serious infections were common adverse events, mainly in RCTs.
PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER
CRD42020196711.
Topics: Humans; Arthritis, Psoriatic; Incidence; Interleukin-12; Axial Spondyloarthritis; Research Design; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 37714666
DOI: 10.1136/rmdopen-2023-003064 -
Medicine Sep 2023To assess the safety and efficacy of sorafenib and sunitinib as first-line treatments for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC), to provide evidence-based support for... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Sorafenib exhibits lower toxicity and comparable efficacy to sunitinib as a first-line treatment for metastatic renal cell carcinoma: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
To assess the safety and efficacy of sorafenib and sunitinib as first-line treatments for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC), to provide evidence-based support for clinical decision-making regarding rational drug use.
METHODS
Until May 10, 2023, a comprehensive search was conducted across PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and Wanfang databases to identify clinical studies comparing sorafenib with sunitinib as first-line treatment for mRCC. The literature was screened, data extracted, and quality evaluated independently by 2 researchers. Meta-analysis was conducted using Revman5.4 software.
RESULTS
A total of 3741 patients were enrolled in 20 studies. The meta-analysis results indicated that there were no significant differences in the 2- and 5-year progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) rates between the sorafenib and sunitinib groups (P > .05). The disease control rate (DCR) was comparable between the 2 groups (P > .05), while the objective response rate (ORR) was higher in the sunitinib group (P = .03). However, subgroup analysis revealed no significant differences in ORR, DCR, 2- and 5-year PFS, and OS rates between sorafenib and sunitinib among both Asian populations as well as European and American populations (P > .05). In terms of drug-related adverse events, the incidence of grade ≥ 3 hypertension, leukopenia, neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, anemia, nausea and vomiting were significantly lower in the sorafenib group compared to the sunitinib group (P < .05).
CONCLUSION
In the first-line treatment of mRCC, sorafenib exhibits comparable efficacy to sunitinib but with lower toxicity.
Topics: Humans; Carcinoma, Renal Cell; Sorafenib; Sunitinib; Kidney Neoplasms; Neutropenia
PubMed: 37682147
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000034983 -
European Journal of Medical Research Aug 2023Previous studies showed that the combination of bevacizumab and erlotinib (combination therapy) significantly prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) but no overall... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
Previous studies showed that the combination of bevacizumab and erlotinib (combination therapy) significantly prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) but no overall survival (OS) compared to erlotinib alone (monotherapy) for advanced EGFR-mutant non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Two phase III randomized controlled trials (RCTs) had reported the OS results in 2021. This meta-analysis aimed to include the results of the two RCTs to make a decision.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
We systematically searched relevant databases for RCTs on the use of bevacizumab plus erlotinib in advanced EGFR-mutant NSCLC. The main outcomes of interest were PFS, OS, and the reported hazard ratio (HR). Fixed-effect model was used to estimate pooled HR.
RESULTS
Total 5 RCTs with 935 patients were eligible for this meta-analysis. All studies reached their primary study endpoints including PFS and OS. Compared to monotherapy, combination therapy remarkably prolonged PFS (HR = 0.60, 95% confidence interval CI 0.51-0.70; p < 0.00001); however, OS was similar between the two groups (HR = 0.90, 95% CI 0.76-1.08; p = 0.26). Subgroup analysis demonstrated that in deletion within exon 19 (19del) mutation subgroup, the combination therapy could only prolong PFS (HR = 0.60, 95% CI 0.47-0.76; p < 0.0001) but not OS (HR = 1.00, 95% CI 0.73-1.37; p = 1.00), and also in leucine-to-arginine substitution in exon 21 (L858R) mutation subgroup (HR = 0.59, p < 0.0001 and HR = 0.80, p = 0.18, respectively). For patients with brain metastasis at baseline, the combination therapy achieved a significant better PFS than the monotherapy (HR = 0.60, 95% CI 0.39-0.90; p = 0.01), and a better OS with the difference marginally significant (HR = 0.69, 95% CI 0.46-1.02; p = 0.06).
CONCLUSIONS
Combination of bevacizumab and erlotinib can prolong progression-free survival but not overall survival compared to erlotinib alone in advanced EGFR-mutant non-small cell lung cancer patients. The combination therapy not only can prolong progression-free survival but also has a tendency to prolong overall survival for patients with brain metastasis at baseline.
Topics: Humans; Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung; Bevacizumab; Erlotinib Hydrochloride; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Brain Neoplasms; Lung Neoplasms; ErbB Receptors
PubMed: 37635242
DOI: 10.1186/s40001-023-01272-7 -
Frontiers in Immunology 2023Previous studies revealed that Programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1)/Programmed cell death-Ligand protein 1 (PD-L1) inhibitors plus anti-angiogenic agents had extensive... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
The benefit and risk of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors plus anti-angiogenic agents as second or later-line treatment for patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: a systematic review and single-arm meta-analysis of prospective clinical trials.
BACKGROUND
Previous studies revealed that Programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1)/Programmed cell death-Ligand protein 1 (PD-L1) inhibitors plus anti-angiogenic agents had extensive anti-tumor activities. However, almost all studies on the efficacy and safety of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors plus anti-angiogenic agents as second or later-line treatment for patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer are non-randomized controlled trials with small sample sizes, which might lead to a lack of effective metrics to assess the effectiveness and safety of the therapeutic regimen. Here, this meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors plus anti-angiogenic agents as second or later-line treatment for patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer.
METHODS
A single-arm meta-analysis was performed, and published literature from PubMed, Web of Science and Embase databases as of January 13, 2023, was systematically retrieved. We used the Cochrane risk of bias tool and methodological index for non-randomized studies (MINORS) Methodological items to evaluate the quality of eligible clinical trials. Outcomes including overall response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and adverse events (AEs) were extracted for further analysis. The random effect model is used to calculate the pooled parameters.
RESULTS
19 studies (16 were non-comparative single-arm clinical trials and 3 were randomized controlled trials) were enrolled in this meta-analysis. In terms of tumor response, the pooled ORR and DCR were 22.4% (95% CI, 16.6-28.1%) and 76.8% (95% CI, 72.6-81.1%), respectively. With regard to survival analysis, the pooled PFS and OS were 5.20 (95% CI, 4.46-5.93) months and 14.09 (95% CI, 13.20-14.97) months, respectively. The pooled grade ≥3 adverse effect (AE) rate was 47.6% (95% CI, 33.1-62.0%).
CONCLUSION
PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors plus anti-angiogenic agents has promising efficacy and safety as second or later-line treatment in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier CRD42023407559.
Topics: Humans; Angiogenesis Inhibitors; Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung; Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors; Lung Neoplasms; Programmed Cell Death 1 Receptor; Prospective Studies; Clinical Trials as Topic
PubMed: 37614237
DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2023.1218258 -
BMC Cancer Aug 2023Patients with triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) are generally younger and more likely to experience disease recurrence and have the shortest survival among all breast... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Neoadjuvant immunotherapy and chemotherapy regimens for the treatment of high-risk, early-stage triple-negative breast cancer: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
Patients with triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) are generally younger and more likely to experience disease recurrence and have the shortest survival among all breast cancer patients. Recently, neoadjuvant delivery of the programmed cell death protein-1 inhibitor pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy followed by adjuvant pembrolizumab was approved for patients with high-risk, early-stage TNBC, but this treatment regimen has not been evaluated in head-to-head trials with other neoadjuvant treatment regimens. Therefore, the objective of this study was to estimate the relative efficacy of neoadjuvant pembrolizumab + chemotherapy followed by adjuvant pembrolizumab versus other neoadjuvant treatments for early-stage TNBC through a systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA).
METHODS
EMBASE, MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, conference abstracts, and clinical trial registries were searched for randomized controlled trials evaluating neoadjuvant treatments for early-stage TNBC. NMA was performed to estimate relative treatment effects among evaluated interventions.
RESULTS
Five trials met the inclusion criteria and were included in the NMA. The relative efficacy of neoadjuvant pembrolizumab + chemotherapy followed by adjuvant pembrolizumab was favorable to paclitaxel followed by anthracycline + cyclophosphamide in terms of pathologic complete response (pCR), event-free survival (EFS), and overall survival; paclitaxel + carboplatin followed by anthracycline + cyclophosphamide in terms of pCR and EFS; paclitaxel + bevacizumab followed by anthracycline + cyclophosphamide + bevacizumab in terms of pCR; and paclitaxel + carboplatin + veliparib followed by anthracycline + cyclophosphamide in terms of EFS.
CONCLUSIONS
Neoadjuvant pembrolizumab + chemotherapy followed by adjuvant pembrolizumab confers benefits in response and survival outcomes versus alternative neoadjuvant treatments for early-stage TNBC.
Topics: Humans; Neoadjuvant Therapy; Triple Negative Breast Neoplasms; Network Meta-Analysis; Bevacizumab; Carboplatin; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local; Immunotherapy; Adjuvants, Immunologic; Anthracyclines; Cyclophosphamide; Paclitaxel
PubMed: 37612624
DOI: 10.1186/s12885-023-11293-4 -
International Immunopharmacology Oct 2023Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) with angiogenesis inhibitors have been used to treat advanced lung cancer. Their associated treatment-related adverse events (trAEs)... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) with angiogenesis inhibitors have been used to treat advanced lung cancer. Their associated treatment-related adverse events (trAEs) are currently considered acceptable; however, no conclusion has been reached. We aimed to summarize the trAEs caused by ICIs combined with angiogenesis inhibitors in patients with advanced lung cancer.
METHODS
Pulled studies met the following criteria: patients with advanced lung cancer who received treatment involving ICIs combined with angiogenesis inhibitors (with or without chemotherapy) in interventional or observational studies. Results included the type and number of trAEs or immune-related adverse events (irAEs), treatment-associated discontinuation and mortality, overall survival (OS), and progression-free survival (PFS).
PROSPERO
CRD42022337656.
RESULTS
The study enrolled 32 trials involving 2313 patients who had 7768 any-grade trAEs and 1078 grade ≥3 trAEs. The pooled incidences were 87.33% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 79.49-93.65; I = 94.04%) for any-grade trAEs, and 38.63% (95% CI: 28.28-49.50; I = 95.61%) for grade ≥3 trAEs. There were 132 kinds of any-grade trAEs involving 18 systems, and 99 kinds of grade ≥3 trAEs involving 16 systems. For all trAEs, we observed significant differences in the line of therapy, trial design, therapy combination, and types of angiogenesis inhibitors (all P < 0.05). The rate of trAEs increased with dosage and frequency of medication. Pooled incidences of discontinuation and mortality were 10.64% and 0.81%, respectively. Nearly 647 patients experienced irAEs, including 636 any-grade irAEs and 154 grade ≥3 irAEs.
CONCLUSIONS
Overall, the incidence of trAEs caused by ICIs combined with angiogenesis inhibitors is generally acceptable. These trAEs have a wide spectrum nearly covering the full range of adverse events. Grade ≥3 trAEs are more closely associated with angiogenesis inhibitors than any grade. However, treatment-associated mortality remains concerning.
Topics: Humans; Angiogenesis Inhibitors; Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors; Lung Neoplasms; Progression-Free Survival
PubMed: 37598630
DOI: 10.1016/j.intimp.2023.110785