Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16506069›Full record

ReviewCancer immunology, immunotherapy : CII2006

Cancer vaccines as a therapeutic modality: The long trek.

A G Dalgleish, M A Whelan

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

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 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 35 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Novel Vaccine Targeting Colonic Adenoma: a Pre-clinical Model.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2019
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Plant-derived EpCAM antigen induces protective anti-cancer response.Cancer immunology, immunotherapy : CII · 2008
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Rebuilding immunity in cancer patients.Blood cells, molecules & diseases
    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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

A G DalgleishDepartment of Oncology, St. George's Hospital Medical School, Cranmer Terrace, SW17 0RE, London, UK. dalgleis@sgul.ac.uk
M A Whelan
St George's Hospital · GBSt George's, University of London · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The development of cancer vaccines has been one of the several false dawns in which initial promising Phase I and Phase II clinical data have not been followed up with conclusive Phase III trials. In this review, we describe some of the successes and failures, and review the most likely reasons for Phase III failure, such as protocol changes, which are common between Phase II and III, and poorly defined patient groups. Nevertheless, significant survival results have been reported with autologous vaccines for colorectal, renal and, more recently, prostate cancer. In addition, it is becoming evident that immunotherapy is potentially synergistic with other treatment modalities, such as chemotherapy, which can reduce T-regulatory activity that inhibits the immune response to cancer vaccines. This potential for synergy should allow cancer vaccines to become part of the standard treatment regimen for many common tumours.

Indexed as

Cancer VaccinesClinical Trials as TopicHumansImmunotherapyNeoplasmsCancer Vaccines

Identifiers

PMID16506069
PMCPMC11030604
OpenAlexW2085930268

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.