Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30135516›Full record

ReviewExperimental & molecular medicine2018

Future prospects of immune checkpoint blockade in cancer: from response prediction to overcoming resistance.

Young-Jun Park, Da-Sol Kuen, Yeonseok Chung

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Experimental & molecular medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 111 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
111citing 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

111 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Disruption of the PGEbioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024
    Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

51 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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.

Young-Jun Park *Laboratory of Immune Regulation, Research Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences, College of Pharmacy, Seoul National University, Seoul, 08826, Republic of Korea. flavah00@snu.ac.kr.
Da-Sol KuenLaboratory of Immune Regulation, Research Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences, College of Pharmacy, Seoul National University, Seoul, 08826, Republic of Korea.
Yeonseok Chung *Laboratory of Immune Regulation, Research Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences, College of Pharmacy, Seoul National University, Seoul, 08826, Republic of Korea. yeonseok@snu.ac.kr.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5780-4841

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recent advances in the understating of tumor immunology suggest that cancer immunotherapy is an effective treatment against various types of cancer. In particular, the remarkable successes of immune checkpoint-blocking antibodies in clinical settings have encouraged researchers to focus on developing other various immunologic strategies to combat cancer. However, such immunotherapies still face difficulties in controlling malignancy in many patients due to the heterogeneity of both tumors and individual patients. Here, we discuss how tumor-intrinsic cues, tumor environmental metabolites, and host-derived immune cells might impact the efficacy and resistance often seen during immune checkpoint blockade treatment. Furthermore, we introduce biomarkers identified from human and mouse models that predict clinical benefits for immune checkpoint blockers in cancer.

Indexed as

Drug Resistance, NeoplasmImmunotherapyAnimalsGastrointestinal MicrobiomeHumansNeoplasmsPrognosisTumor Microenvironment

Identifiers

PMID30135516
PMCPMC6105674

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.