Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26694936›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Cancer2016

Biomaterials and emerging anticancer therapeutics: engineering the microenvironment.

Luo Gu, David J Mooney

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Cancer, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 160 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
160citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

160 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Influence of different region of interest sizes on CT-based radiomics model for microvascular invasion prediction in hepatocellular carcinoma.Zhong nan da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Central South University. Medical sciences · 2022
    Trial
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Starch-Based Scaffolds for Cultivated Meat Production: Challenges and Perspectives.Comprehensive reviews in food science and food safety · 2025
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Regenerative therapy · 2025
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Materials today. Bio · 2025
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review

100 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

2 authors.

Luo GuPaulson School of Engineering and Applied Sciences, and the Wyss Institute for Biologically Inspired Engineering, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138, USA.
David J MooneyPaulson School of Engineering and Applied Sciences, and the Wyss Institute for Biologically Inspired Engineering, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138, USA.

Funding

Biomaterial based breast cancer vaccineR01EB015498 · NIBIB · HARVARD MEDICAL SCHOOL · PI MOONEY, DAVID J · 2013 to 2016
$1.5M
NIBIB NIH HHS R01 EB015498
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The microenvironment is increasingly recognized to have key roles in cancer, and biomaterials provide a means to engineer microenvironments both in vitro and in vivo to study and manipulate cancer. In vitro cancer models using 3D matrices recapitulate key elements of the tumour microenvironment and have revealed new aspects of cancer biology. Cancer vaccines based on some of the same biomaterials have, in parallel, allowed for the engineering of durable prophylactic and therapeutic anticancer activity in preclinical studies, and some of these vaccines have moved to clinical trials. The impact of biomaterials engineering on cancer treatment is expected to further increase in importance in the years to come.

Indexed as

Biocompatible MaterialsTissue EngineeringTumor MicroenvironmentHumansNeoplasmsBiocompatible Materials

Identifiers

PMID26694936
PMCPMC4790726

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.