ReviewThe Yale journal of biology and medicine2014
Anti-cancer vaccines - a one-hit wonder?
Review in The Yale journal of biology and medicine, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 39 citations in OpenAlex.
- Harnessing engineered extracellular vesicles for enhanced therapeutic efficacy: advancements in cancer immunotherapy.Journal of experimental & clinical cancer research : CR · 2025Review
- Cancer immunotherapy and its facilitation by nanomedicine.Biomarker research · 2024Review
- Evaluation of the antitumor effect of neoantigen peptide vaccines derived from the translatome of lung cancer.Cancer immunology, immunotherapy : CII · 2024Article
- The role of viruses in cancer development versus cancer therapy: An oncological perspective.Cancer medicine · 2023Review
- Immunotherapies for hepatocellular carcinoma.Cancer medicine · 2022Review
- Induced pluripotent stem cells as a novel cancer vaccine.Expert opinion on biological therapy · 2019Review
- Review
- Enzymatic Synthesis of N-Acetyllactosamine (LacNAc) Type 1 Oligomers and Characterization as Multivalent Galectin Ligands.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2017Article
- Article
- Article
- Chemoprevention of cancer: current evidence and future prospects.F1000Research · 2015Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Immunization against common bacterial and viral diseases has helped prevent millions of deaths worldwide. More recently, the concept of vaccination has been developed into a potentially novel strategy to treat and prevent cancer formation, progression, and spread. Over the past few years, a handful of anti-cancer vaccines have been licensed and approved for use in clinical practice, thus providing a breakthrough in the field. However, the path has not always been easy, with many hurdles that have had to be overcome in order to reach this point. Nevertheless, with more anti-cancer vaccines currently in development, there is still hope that they can eventually become routine tools used in the treatment and prevention of cancer in the future. This review will discuss in detail both types of anti-cancer vaccine presently used in clinical practice - therapeutic and preventive - before considering some of the more promising anti-cancer vaccines that are currently in development. Finally, the issue of side effects and the debate surrounding the overall cost-effectiveness of anti-cancer vaccines will be examined.
Indexed as
Identifiers
25506282PMC4257035W12605363What 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.