Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27703409›Full record

ReviewSarcoma2016

Current Immunotherapies for Sarcoma: Clinical Trials and Rationale.

Demytra Mitsis, Valerie Francescutti, Joseph Skitzki

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Sarcoma, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing 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

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Correlative Analyses of the SARC028 Trial Reveal an Association Between Sarcoma-Associated Immune Infiltrate and Response to Pembrolizumab.Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research · 2020
    Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. The Landscape of Immunotherapy for Retroperitoneal Sarcoma.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2023
    Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Sarcoma-The standard-bearer in cancer discovery.Critical reviews in oncology/hematology · 2018
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Managing sarcoma: where have we come from and where are we going?Therapeutic advances in medical oncology · 2017
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
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.

Demytra MitsisDepartment of Medical Oncology, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, NY 14263, USA.
Valerie FrancescuttiDepartment of Surgical Oncology, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, NY 14263, USA.
Joseph SkitzkiDepartment of Surgical Oncology, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, NY 14263, USA; Department of Immunology, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, NY 14263, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-3689-2843

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Sarcoma tumors are rare and heterogeneous, yet they possess many characteristics that may facilitate immunotherapeutic responses. Both active strategies including vaccines and passive strategies involving cellular adoptive immunotherapy have been applied clinically. Results of these clinical trials indicate a distinct benefit for select patients. The recent breakthrough of immunologic checkpoint inhibition is being rapidly introduced to a variety of tumor types including sarcoma. It is anticipated that these emerging immunotherapies will exhibit clinical efficacy for a variety of sarcomas. The increasing ability to tailor immunologic therapies to sarcoma patients will undoubtedly generate further enthusiasm and clinical research for this treatment modality.

Identifiers

PMID27703409
PMCPMC5039267

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.