ReviewFuture oncology (London, England)2017
Challenges faced when identifying patients for combination immunotherapy.
Review in Future oncology (London, England), 2017. 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, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Nutrition in Oncology: Overcoming Challenges to Optimize the Patient Journey from Prehabilitation to Rehabilitation.Oncology and therapy · 2025Review
- Case Report: sintilimab-induced Stevens-Johnson Syndrome in a patient with advanced lung adenocarcinoma.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Article
- Diagnostic and Prognostic Deep Learning Applications for Histological Assessment of Cutaneous Melanoma.Cancers · 2022Review
- [Clinical features of immune checkpoint inhibitor-related myositis in patients with urological cancer].Beijing da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Peking University. Health sciences · 2022Article
- Preoperative radiomics model using gadobenate dimeglumine-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging for predicting β-catenin mutation in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma: A retrospective study.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Article
- Cutaneous Adverse Events of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors: A Literature Review.Dermatology practical & conceptual · 2021Review
- Identification and Classification of Polymyalgia Rheumatica (PMR) and PMR-Like Syndromes Following Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors (ICIs) Therapy: Discussion Points and Grey Areas Emerging from a Systematic Review of Published Literature.Medicines (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Review
- Toxicity of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors: Considerations for the Surgeon.Annals of surgical oncology · 2020Review
- Severe toxicity from checkpoint protein inhibitors: What intensive care physicians need to know?Annals of intensive care · 2019Review
- Review
- Managing toxicities associated with immune checkpoint inhibitors: consensus recommendations from the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) Toxicity Management Working Group.Journal for immunotherapy of cancer · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
In 1996, Jim Allison demonstrated that blocking the immune regulatory molecule CTLA-4 with anit-CTLA4 antibody led to enhance tumor responses in mice. It would take an additional 15 years for human studies to confirm the potency and clinical efficacy of anti-CTLA4, ultimately leading to US FDA approval of the first checkpoint inhibitor, ipilimumab. Now with a plethora of immune-modulating agents demonstrating single agent safety and benefit across many tumor types, investigation on the optimal combination of immune-based therapies has begun in earnest. While there are many challenges, a central one is how to select which combination for which patient is the best. Here we review the current approaches that a practitioner can use to achieve this therapeutic goal.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.