Early discontinuation of immune checkpoint inhibitors for toxicity doesn't have negative consequ

Article link

Patients who discontinued early after experiencing toxicity from immune checkpoint inhibitors not only had good outcomes, they had better outcomes that those who did not experience toxicity. This is an interesting observation of currently unclear significance. Do patients who received more treatment have better outcomes because of overall drug exposure, or is toxicity a marker for something that predicts treatment outcome?

But at least patients shouldn't worry too much about the consequences of early discontinuation from the perspective of efficacy. Perhaps the most interesting aspect is that patients who experienced toxicity had better outcomes that those who did not. Dose intensity isn't a relevant concept apparently. So is there a minimal amount of drug exposure to ensure anti-cancer activity. Is that a meaningful concept for all patients? Does the occurrence of toxicity modify the meaning of the dose-response concept? Will this observation prove to be applicable to other types of immunothrapy?