ArticleCell cycle (Georgetown, Tex.)2013
Changing T-cell enigma: cancer killing or cancer control?
Article in Cell cycle (Georgetown, Tex.), 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Advances in traditional Chinese herbal medicine and their pharmacodynamic mechanisms in cancer immunoregulation: a narrative review.Translational cancer research · 2024Review
- Cytokine-Induced Senescence in the Tumor Microenvironment and Its Effects on Anti-Tumor Immune Responses.Cancers · 2022Review
- Article
- Innate extracellular vesicles from melanoma patients suppress β-catenin in tumor cells by miRNA-34a.Life science alliance · 2019Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Data from different laboratories and theoretical considerations challenge our current view on anticancer immunity. Immune cells are capable of destroying cancer cells under in vitro and in vivo conditions. Therefore, cellular immunity is considered to control cancers through mechanisms that kill cancers. Yet, therapeutic anticancer immune responses rarely delete cancers. If efficient, they rather establish a life with stable disease. This raises the question of whether killing is the sole mechanism by which immune therapy attacks cancers. Here, we show that, besides cancer eradication by cytotoxic lymphocytes, other modes of action are operative and strictly required for cancer control. We show that T helper-1 cells arrest cancer growth by driving cancers into a state of stable or permanent growth arrest, called senescence. Such immune cells establish cytokine-producing walls around developing cancers. When producing interferon-γ and tumor necrosis factor, this cytokine-induced tumor immune-surveillance keeps the cancer cells in a permanently non-proliferating state. Simultaneously, antiangiogenic chemokines cut their connections to the surrounding tissues. This strategy significantly reduces tumor burden and prolongs life of cancer-bearing animals. As human cancers also undergo senescence, the current data suggest tumor-immune surveillance through cytokine-induced senescence, instead of tumor eradication, as the more realistic and primary goal of cancer control.
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.