Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29525074›Full record

ReviewMolecular immunology2018

Nanoscale artificial antigen presenting cells for cancer immunotherapy.

Kelly R Rhodes, Jordan J Green

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Molecular immunology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 42 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
42citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.7field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

42 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 87 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. RSC advances · 2023
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Kelly R RhodesDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Translational Tissue Engineering Center, and Institute for NanoBioTechnology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, United States.
Jordan J GreenDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Translational Tissue Engineering Center, and Institute for NanoBioTechnology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, United States; Bloomberg-Kimmel Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy, Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Departments of Oncology, Materials Science and Engineering, Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering, Ophthalmology, and Neurosurgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, United States. Electronic address: green@jhu.edu.
Bloomberg (United States) · USJohns Hopkins University · US

Funding

Cancer-specific nanoparticle-mediated gene therapy to treat hepatocellular carcinomaR01EB022148 · NIBIB · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI GREEN, JORDAN · 2016 to 2019
$1.5M
NIBIB NIH HHS R01 EB022148
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Exciting developments in cancer nanomedicine include the engineering of nanocarriers to deliver drugs locally to tumors, increasing efficacy and reducing off-target toxicity associated with chemotherapies. Despite nanocarrier advances, metastatic cancer remains challenging to treat due to barriers that prevent nanoparticles from gaining access to remote, dispersed, and poorly vascularized metastatic tumors. Instead of relying on nanoparticles to directly destroy every tumor cell, immunotherapeutic approaches target immune cells to train them to recognize and destroy tumor cells, which, due to the amplification and specificity of an adaptive immune response, may be a more effective approach to treating metastatic cancer. One novel technology for cancer immunotherapy is the artificial antigen presenting cell (aAPC), a micro- or nanoparticle-based system that mimics an antigen presenting cell by presenting important signal proteins to T cells to activate them against cancer. Signal 1 molecules target the T cell receptor and facilitate antigen recognition by T cells, signal 2 molecules provide costimulation essential for T cell activation, and signal 3 consists of secreted cues that further stimulate T cells. Classic microscale aAPCs present signal 1 and 2 molecules on their surface, and biodegradable polymeric aAPCs offer the additional capability of releasing signal 3 cytokines and costimulatory molecules that modulate the T cell response. Although particles of approximately 5-10 μm in diameter may be considered the optimal size of an aAPC for ex vivo cellular expansion, nanoscale aAPCs have demonstrated superior in vivo pharmacokinetic properties and are more suitable for systemic injection. As sufficient surface contact between T cells and aAPCs is essential for activation, nano-aAPCs with microscale contact surface areas have been created through engineering approaches such as shape manipulation and nanoparticle clustering. These design strategies have demonstrated greatly enhanced efficacy of nano-aAPCs, endowing nano-aAPCs with the potential to be among the next generation of cancer nanomedicines.

Indexed as

AnimalsAntigen-Presenting CellsArtificial CellsBiomimeticsHumansImmunotherapyMagnetite NanoparticlesMiceNanomedicineNanoparticlesNanotechnologyNeoplasmsParticle SizeMagnetite NanoparticlesaAPCCancerImmunoengineeringNanomedicinePolymer

Identifiers

PMID29525074
PMCPMC6084459
OpenAlexW2792174072

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.