Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27713273›Full record

ReviewPharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland)2010

Hybridoma-Derived Idiotype Vaccine for Lymphoma: Approval Must Wait.

Maurizio Bendandi

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland), 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 85% 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Maurizio BendandiCenter for Applied Medical Research and University Hospital, University of Navarra, Avda. Pio XII 36-55, 31008 Pamplona, Spain. mbendandi@unav.es.
Universidad de Navarra · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Hybridoma-derived idiotype vaccines have been used for the experimental treatment of human lymphoma over the last twenty years, providing evidence of biological efficacy, clinical efficacy and clinical benefit. However, the product that has come closer to regulatory approval is unlikely to clear that hurdle due to the insufficiently robust data obtained in a recently closed clinical trial. This review aims at discussing the reasons for hybridoma-derived idiotype vaccines, more difficult to produce but also more successful than recombinant idiotype vaccines so far, are unlikely to gain regulatory approval. In particular, it is necessary to examine the many peculiar features of this therapeutic approach in a broader context, with special attention to concepts like customized active immunotherapy and randomization. Most published trials based on hybridoma-derived idiotype vaccines are being analyzed, together with the yet non-peer reviewed data from the only randomized study conducted so far with this product, and with the main trials on recombinant idiotype vaccines for thorough comparison. All in all, the sole randomized trial ever conducted on hybridoma-derived idiotype vaccines failed to achieve its primary clinical end point because of an insufficient accrual and because the statistical significance achieved was not as stringent as required for regulatory approval.

Indexed as

hybridomaidiotypeimmune responselymphomarandomized trialsrecombinantvaccine

Identifiers

PMID27713273
PMCPMC4033974
OpenAlexW2088350402

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.