Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21327055›Full record

ReviewBioengineered bugs

Live, attenuated strains of Listeria and Salmonella as vaccine vectors in cancer treatment.

Vafa Shahabi, Paulo C Maciag, Sandra Rivera, Anu Wallecha

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Bioengineered bugs. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed
5.7field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

33 citing papers in PubMed, 63 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Live Bacterial Vectors-A Promising DNA Vaccine Delivery System.Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2018
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Dendritic cell therapy in melanoma.Annals of translational medicine · 2017
    Review
  15. Review
  16. Enhancing vaccine effectiveness with delivery technology.Current opinion in biotechnology · 2016
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Bacteria in Cancer Therapy: Renaissance of an Old Concept.International journal of microbiology · 2016
    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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Vafa ShahabiAdvaxis Inc., Research and Development, North Brunswick, NJ, USA.
Paulo C Maciag
Sandra Rivera
Anu Wallecha
Advaxis (United States) · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Live, attenuated strains of many bacteria that synthesize and secrete foreign antigens are being developed as vaccines for a number of infectious diseases and cancer. Bacterial-based vaccines provide a number of advantages over other antigen delivery strategies including low cost of production, the absence of animal products, genetic stability and safety. In addition, bacterial vaccines delivering a tumor-associated antigen (TAA) stimulate innate immunity and also activate both arms of the adaptive immune system by which they exert efficacious anti-tumor effects. Listeria monocytogenes and several strains of Salmonella have been most extensively studied for this purpose. A number of attenuated strains have been generated and used to deliver antigens associated with infectious diseases and cancer. Although both bacteria are intracellular, the immune responses invoked by Listeria and Salmonella are different due to their sub-cellular locations. Upon entering antigen-presenting cells by phagocytosis, Listeria is capable of escaping from the phagosomal compartment and thus has direct access to the cell cytosol. Proteins delivered by this vector behave as endogenous antigens, are presented on the cell surface in the context of MHC class I molecules, and generate strong cell-mediated immune responses. In contrast, proteins delivered by Salmonella, which lacks a phagosomal escape mechanism, are treated as exogenous antigens and presented by MHC class II molecules resulting predominantly in Th2 type immune responses. This fundamental disparity between the life cycles of the two vectors accounts for their differential application as antigen delivery vehicles. The present paper includes a review of the most recent advances in the development of these two bacterial vectors for treatment of cancer. Similarities and differences between the two vectors are discussed.

Indexed as

AnimalsAntigen-Presenting CellsCancer VaccinesHistocompatibility Antigens Class IHumansListeriaModels, BiologicalNeoplasmsSalmonellaCancer VaccinesHistocompatibility Antigens Class IbacteriacancerimmunotherapyListeriaSalmonellavaccine

Identifiers

PMID21327055
PMCPMC3026462
OpenAlexW2053780042

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.