ReviewCurrent treatment options in oncology2014
Update on vaccines for high-risk melanoma.
Review in Current treatment options in oncology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Meta-Analysis on Randomized Controlled Trials of Vaccines with QS-21 or ISCOMATRIX Adjuvant: Safety and Tolerability.PloS one · 2016Pooled it
- A phase I/IIa clinical trial in stage IV melanoma of an autologous tumor-dendritic cell fusion (dendritoma) vaccine with low dose interleukin-2.Cancer immunology, immunotherapy : CII · 2016Trial
- Immunotherapy for glioblastoma: are we finally getting closer?Neuro-oncology · 2015Article
- Brucella spp. Lumazine Synthase Induces a TLR4-Mediated Protective Response against B16 Melanoma in Mice.PloS one · 2015Article
- What have we learned from cancer immunotherapy in the last 3 years?Journal of translational medicine · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The management of high-risk melanoma has historically included primary surgical resection with or without lymphadenectomy followed by an array of adjuvant options including radiation therapy or immunomodulatory therapies such as interferon-α, granulocyte macrophage colony-stimulating factor, and a multitude of vaccines. There has been a long-standing interest in the development of vaccines in high-risk and metastatic melanoma, and clinical trials have been ongoing for decades. Given that melanoma is identified as one of the most immunogenic solid tumors, there is continued hope that vaccine therapies will improve clinical outcomes. Despite intense interest in this field, few clinical trials to-date have demonstrated significant benefit from melanoma vaccines in high-risk disease. Several trials have even documented a detrimental effect on outcomes after vaccine administration. While the role of vaccines in the adjuvant setting of high-risk melanoma presently remains unclear, recent advances in immunotherapy for melanoma including development of cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen 4 (CTLA-4) and programmed cell death 1 (PD-1) monoclonal antibodies have demonstrated meaningful clinical responses. With further study and focus on mechanisms of immune regulation, there remains promise for the role of vaccines in combination with other immune-stimulatory agents in high-risk melanoma.
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.