Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27249163›Full record

ReviewHuman vaccines & immunotherapeutics2016

Bispecific antibodies in cancer immunotherapy.

Siqi Chen, Jing Li, Qing Li, Zhong Wang

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed
5.7field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

29 citing papers in PubMed, 52 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Reprogramming cancer immunity with next-generation combination therapies.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2025
    Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Emerging Trends in Immunotherapy for Cancer.Diseases (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Siqi Chena School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Sun Yat-Sen University , Guangzhou , China.
Jing Lia School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Sun Yat-Sen University , Guangzhou , China.
Qing Lia School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Sun Yat-Sen University , Guangzhou , China.
Zhong Wanga School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Sun Yat-Sen University , Guangzhou , China.
Sun Yat-sen University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cancer immunotherapy has recently generated much excitement after the continuing success of the immunomodulating anti-CTLA-4 and anti-PD-1 antibodies against various types of cancers. Aside from these immunomodulating antibodies, bispecific antibodies, chimeric antigen receptor T cells, and other technologies are being actively studied. Among the various approaches to cancer immunotherapy, 2 bispecific antibodies are currently approved for patient care. Many more bispecific antibodies are now in various phases of clinical development and will become the next generation of antibody-based therapies. Further understanding of immunology and advances in protein engineering will help to generate a greater variety of bispecific antibodies to fight cancer. Here, we focus on bispecific antibodies that recruit immune cells to engage and kill tumor cells.

Indexed as

Antibodies, BispecificDrug ApprovalDrug DiscoveryHumansImmunologic FactorsImmunotherapyNeoplasmsAntibodies, BispecificImmunologic Factorsbispecific antibodycancerheterodimerizationimmunotherapyNK cellsscFvsingle domain antibodyT cells

Identifiers

PMID27249163
PMCPMC5084997
OpenAlexW2462633163

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.