ReviewCurrent treatment options in oncology2012
Adoptive immunotherapy of advanced melanoma.
Review in Current treatment options in oncology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Biomaterials for enhanced immunotherapy.APL bioengineering · 2022Review
- Comparison of non-myeloablative lymphodepleting preconditioning regimens in patients undergoing adoptive T cell therapy.Journal for immunotherapy of cancer · 2021Article
- TLR2/6 agonists and interferon-gamma induce human melanoma cells to produce CXCL10.International journal of cancer · 2015Article
- CT halo sign as an imaging marker for response to adoptive cell therapy in metastatic melanoma with pulmonary metastases.European radiology · 2014Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Adoptive cell therapy (ACT) has emerged as an effective therapy for patients with metastatic melanoma. Since the first introduction of the protocol in 1988 [1], major improvements have been achieved with response rates of 40%-72% among patients who were resistant to previous treatment lines. Both cell product and conditioning regimen are major determinants of treatment efficacy; therefore, developing ACT protocols explore diverse ways to establish autologous intra-tumoral lymphocyte cultures or peripheral effector cells as well as different lymphodepleting regimens. While a proof of feasibility and a proof of concept had been established with previous published results, ACT will need to move beyond single-center experiences, to confirmatory, multi-center studies. If ACT is to move into widespread practice, it will be necessary to develop reproducible high quality cell production methods and accepted lymphodepleting regimen. Two new drugs, ipilimumab (Yervoy, Bristol-Myers Squibb) and vemurafenib (Zelboraf, Roche), were approved in 2011 for the treatment of metastatic melanoma based on positive phase III trials. Both drugs show a clear overall survival benefit, so the timing of when to use ACT will need to be carefully thought out. In contrast to these 2 new, commercially available outpatient treatments, ACT is a personally-specified product and labor-intensive therapy that demands both acquisition of high standard laboratory procedures and close clinical inpatient monitoring during treatment. It is unique among other anti-melanoma treatments, providing the potential for a durable response following a single, self-limited treatment. This perspective drives the efforts to make this protocol accessible for more patients and to explore modifications that may optimize treatment results.
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.