Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30446791›Full record

ReviewMammalian genome : official journal of the International Mammalian Genome Society2018

Perspective: cancer vaccines in the era of immune checkpoint blockade.

Jonathan Cebon

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Mammalian genome : official journal of the International Mammalian Genome Society, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 21% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Cancer DNA vaccines: current preclinical and clinical developments and future perspectives.Journal of experimental & clinical cancer research : CR · 2019
    Review
  11. Introduction to Mammalian Genome special issue: inflammation and immunity in cancer.Mammalian genome : official journal of the International Mammalian Genome Society · 2018
    Article
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.

Jonathan CebonCancer Immunobiology Laboratory, Olivia Newton-John Cancer Research Institute, Heidelberg, VIC, Australia. jonathan.cebon@onjcri.org.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3898-950X
La Trobe University · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Current excitement about cancer immunotherapy is the result of unprecedented clinical impact from immune checkpoint inhibitors, particularly those that target programmed death (PD)-1 and PD-ligand (L)-1. Numerous other immunotherapeutics are also finding their way into the clinic either alone or in combination, and these have potential applications in many cancer types. Therapeutic cancer vaccines have been a major focus for many pioneers in the field yet have largely failed to live up to expectations as game-changing immunotherapeutics. This, despite decades of focussed efforts that have identified antigens, optimised adjuvants and refined approaches to pre-clinical modelling and clinical monitoring. If antigen-directed immunotherapeutics are to take a place in the anti-cancer therapeutic armamentarium, it will be crucial to understand the potential niche that could be occupied by cancer vaccines that can specifically induce or modify immune response against cancer antigens.

Indexed as

B7-H1 AntigenCancer VaccinesHumansImmunotherapyNeoplasmsProgrammed Cell Death 1 ReceptorB7-H1 AntigenCancer VaccinesCD274 protein, humanPDCD1 protein, humanProgrammed Cell Death 1 Receptor

Identifiers

PMID30446791
PMCPMC6267701
OpenAlexW2901064446

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.