ReviewHead & neck2018
Exploring the rationale for combining ionizing radiation and immune checkpoint blockade in head and neck cancer.
Review in Head & neck, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Complete tumor resection reverses neutrophilia-associated suppression of systemic anti-tumor immunity.Oral oncology · 2024Article
- Update of latest data for combined therapy for esophageal cancer using radiotherapy and immunotherapy: A focus on efficacy, safety, and biomarkers.Chinese journal of cancer research = Chung-kuo yen cheng yen chiu · 2023Article
- Pharmacologic inhibition of ataxia telangiectasia and Rad3-related (ATR) in the treatment of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma.Molecular carcinogenesis · 2022Review
- Immunotherapy for HPV Malignancies.Seminars in radiation oncology · 2021Review
- Direct and antibody-dependent cell-mediated cytotoxicity of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma cells by high-affinity natural killer cells.Oral oncology · 2019Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe ability of radiation to enhance antitumor immunity under specific experimental conditions is well established. Here, we explore preclinical data and the rationale for combining different radiation doses and fractions with immune checkpoint blockade immunotherapy.
methodsWe conducted a review of the literature.
resultsThe ability of high-dose or hypofractionated radiation to enhance antitumor immunity resulting in additive or synergistic tumor control when combined with checkpoint blockade is well studied. Whether low-dose daily fractionated radiation does the same is less well studied and available data suggests it may be immunosuppressive.
conclusionAlthough daily fractionated radiation is well established as the standard of care for the treatment of patients with head and neck cancer, how this radiation schema alters antitumor immunity needs further study. If the radiation doses and fractions alter antitumor immunity differently can have profound implications in the rational design of clinical trials investigating whether radiation can enhance response rates to immune checkpoint blockade.
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.