Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33272897›Full record

ReviewSeminars in immunology2021

Nanobodies in cancer.

Elisha R Verhaar, Andrew W Woodham, Hidde L Ploegh

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Seminars in immunology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 63 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
63citing papers in PubMed
6.1field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

63 citing papers in PubMed, 110 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article

3 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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Elisha R VerhaarProgram in Cellular and Molecular Medicine, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, United States.
Andrew W WoodhamProgram in Cellular and Molecular Medicine, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, United States; Department of Pediatrics, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States.
Hidde L PloeghProgram in Cellular and Molecular Medicine, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, United States; Department of Pediatrics, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States. Electronic address: hidde.ploegh@childrens.harvard.edu.
Boston Children's Hospital · USHarvard University · US

Funding

Imposing order on the family of ubiquitin-conjugating (E2) enzymes through intracellular perturbation with nanobodiesDP1AI150593 · NIAID · BOSTON CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL · PI PLOEGH, HIDDE L. · 2019 to 2023
$7.1M
NIAID NIH HHS DP1 AI150593
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

For treatment and diagnosis of cancer, antibodies have proven their value and now serve as a first line of therapy for certain cancers. A unique class of antibody fragments called nanobodies, derived from camelid heavy chain-only antibodies, are gaining increasing acceptance as diagnostic tools and are considered also as building blocks for chimeric antigen receptors as well as for targeted drug delivery. The small size of nanobodies (∼15 kDa), their stability, ease of manufacture and modification for diverse formats, short circulatory half-life, and high tissue penetration, coupled with excellent specificity and affinity, account for their attractiveness. Here we review applications of nanobodies in the sphere of tumor biology.

Indexed as

NeoplasmsSingle-Domain AntibodiesAntibodiesDrug Delivery SystemsHumansAntibodiesSingle-Domain AntibodiesCancerDiagnosticsImagingNanobodiesVHH

Identifiers

PMID33272897
PMCPMC8164649
OpenAlexW3108719116

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.