Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24367164›Full record

ReviewBreast cancer (Dove Medical Press)2010

Progress in the development of a therapeutic vaccine for breast cancer.

Andrew L Coveler, Nicole E Bates, Mary L Disis

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Breast cancer (Dove Medical Press), 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
0.1field-weighted citation impact, top 48% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Immunotherapy for Breast Cancer: What Are We Missing?Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research · 2017
    Article
  3. Breast Cancer Vaccines: New Insights.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2017
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Recent advances in the development of breast cancer vaccines.Breast cancer (Dove Medical Press) · 2014
    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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Andrew L CovelerTumor Vaccine Group, Center for Translational Medicine in Women's Health, University of Washington, Seattle WA, USA.
Nicole E BatesTumor Vaccine Group, Center for Translational Medicine in Women's Health, University of Washington, Seattle WA, USA.
Mary L DisisTumor Vaccine Group, Center for Translational Medicine in Women's Health, University of Washington, Seattle WA, USA.
Institute of Translational Health Sciences · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Various human malignancies are immunogenic and recent cancer vaccine trials have demonstrated potential survival benefit. Breast cancer is immunogenic and there are several tumor associated antigens for which breast cancer vaccines have been developed. Breast cancer vaccines are designed to stimulate the immune response at various steps in the native antigen processing pathway for immunosurveillance. Human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER-2/neu), mucin 1 (MUC-1), and human telomerase reverse transcriptase (hTERT) are some of the most studied antigens actively being targeted for vaccination in breast cancer patients. These vaccines are designed to elicit cytotoxic and/or helper T cell responses. Over the last several years, there has been reported progress in human clinical trials for these antigens. Cancer vaccines have repeatedly been shown to be safe with production of minimal toxicity. Recent clinical advances in the development of cancer vaccines demonstrate the potential clinical benefit that cancer vaccines hold.

Indexed as

breastcancerHER-2/neuhTERTMUC-1vaccine

Identifiers

PMID24367164
PMCPMC3846461
OpenAlexW1974760493

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.