ReviewFrontiers in immunology2019
Targeting Angiogenesis With Peptide Vaccines.
Review in Frontiers in immunology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- First-in-human study of the cancer peptide vaccine TAS0313 in patients with advanced solid tumors.Cancer science · 2021Trial
- Peptides as Versatile Regulators in Cancer Immunotherapy: Recent Advances, Challenges, and Future Prospects.Pharmaceutics · 2025Review
- Nucleic acid cancer vaccines targeting tumor related angiogenesis. Could mRNA vaccines constitute a game changer?Frontiers in immunology · 2024Review
- Vaccination therapy for inflammatory bowel disease.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2023Review
- Design, synthesis and immunological evaluation of self-assembled antigenic peptides from dual-antigen targets: a broad-spectrum candidate for an effective antibreast cancer therapy.Journal for immunotherapy of cancer · 2021Article
- Challenges and Perspectives of Standard Therapy and Drug Development in High-Grade Gliomas.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- A Phase I Open-Label Clinical Trial Evaluating the Therapeutic Vaccine hVEGF26-104/RFASE in Patients with Advanced Solid Malignancies.The oncologist · 2021Article
- Peptide-Based Vaccination Therapy for Rheumatic Diseases.Journal of immunology research · 2020Review
- Overexpression of Limb-Bud and Heart (LBH) promotes angiogenesis in human glioma via VEGFA-mediated ERK signalling under hypoxia.EBioMedicine · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Most cancer peptide vaccinations tested so far are capable of eliciting a strong immune response, but demonstrate poor clinical benefits. Since peptide vaccination is safe and well-tolerated, and several indications suggest that it has clear potential advantages over other modalities of treatment, it is important to investigate the reasons for these clinical failures. In this review, the current state of the art in targeting angiogenic proteins via peptide vaccines is presented, and the underlying reasons for both the successes and the failures are analyzed. The review highlights a number of areas critical for future success, including choice of target antigens, types of peptides used, delivery methods and use of proper adjuvants, and suggests ways to achieve better clinical results in the future.
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.