Evidence map›Paper›PMID 14704832›Full record

ReviewCancer immunology, immunotherapy : CII2004

Monitoring tumor antigen specific T-cell responses in cancer patients and phase I clinical trials of peptide-based vaccination.

Pedro Romero, Jean-Charles Cerottini, Daniel E Speiser

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cancer immunology, immunotherapy : CII, 2004. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Engineering cancer microenvironments forMaterials today (Kidlington, England) · 2015
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Defining MHC class II T helper epitopes for WT1 tumor antigen.Cancer immunology, immunotherapy : CII · 2006
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Pedro RomeroDivison of Clinical Onco-Immunology, Lausanne branch, University Hospital (CHUV), Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research, Lausanne, Switzerland. pedro.romero@isrec.unil.ch
Jean-Charles Cerottini
Daniel E Speiser

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Numerous phase I and II clinical trials testing the safety and immunogenicity of various peptide vaccine formulations based on CTL-defined tumor antigens in cancer patients have been reported during the last 7 years. While specific T-cell responses can be detected in a variable fraction of immunized patients, an even smaller but significant fraction of these patients have objective tumor responses. Efficient therapeutic vaccination should aim at boosting naturally occurring antitumor T- and B-cell responses and at sustaining a large number of tumor antigen specific and fully functional effector T cells at tumor sites. Recent progress in our ability to quantitatively and qualitatively monitor tumor antigen specific CD8 T-cell responses will greatly help in making rapid progress in this field.

Indexed as

Antigens, NeoplasmCancer VaccinesClinical Trials, Phase I as TopicHumansNeoplasmsT-Lymphocytes, CytotoxicVaccinationAntigens, NeoplasmCancer Vaccines

Identifiers

PMID14704832
PMCPMC11032775

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.