ReviewCancer immunology, immunotherapy : CII2006
Is targeted chemotherapy an alternative to immunotherapy in chronic lymphocytic leukemia?
Review in Cancer immunology, immunotherapy : CII, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Correlation of ZAP-70 expression in B cell leukemias to the ex vivo response to a combination of fludarabine/genistein.Cancer immunology, immunotherapy : CII · 2007Article
- Immunotherapy in chronic lymphocytic leukemia.Cancer immunology, immunotherapy : CII · 2006Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Although molecular remission is now detected, it is still unknown whether we have the tools to cure B cell chronic lymphocytic leukemia (referred to as CLL). Nonetheless, several new therapeutic approaches have been introduced in cancer therapy during the last decade, including antiangiogenic therapy, apoptosis-inducing treatment and inhibition of heat shock proteins, farnesyl transferase, tyrosine kinases and proteasomes. These modalities may also be considered in CLL, but additional experimental characterization is required. Further characterization and development of CLL animal models should be a part of this preclinical work (especially xenografting in NOD/SCID animals, but also murine leukemia) to allow a more extensive evaluation prior to clinical trials. Animal models are particularly important for preclinical comparison of pharmacological effects between different disease compartments and for in vivo evaluation of antileukemic immune reactivity. However, T cell targeting therapy seems to have several advantages in comparison to other approaches: (1) based on the current clinical experience one would expect low toxicity for several of these strategies, especially vaccine treatment; (2) several studies have demonstrated that autologous T cells can recognize CLL cells; (3) experimental and clinical evidence suggests that immunotherapy can be combined with chemotherapy. Thus, T cell therapy has a relatively strong scientific basis that justifies further clinical studies of immunotherapy in CLL. Although several of the new pharmacological agents seem to have immunosuppressive effects, at least some of them (e.g. heat shock protein 90 inhibitors, proteasome inhibitors, inhibition of angiogenesis) appear to affect T cells only at relatively high concentrations and may thus be used in combination with immunotherapy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.