Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33455477›Full record

ReviewInternational journal of hyperthermia : the official journal of European Society for Hyperthermic Oncology, North American Hyperthermia Group2020

Chenkai Mao, Michael-Joseph Gorbet, Akansha Singh, Ashish Ranjan, Steven Fiering

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in International journal of hyperthermia : the official journal of European Society for Hyperthermic Oncology, North American Hyperthermia Group, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 26% 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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Emerging Cationic Nanovaccines.Pharmaceutics · 2024
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Toll-Like Receptors as a Therapeutic Target in the Era of Immunotherapies.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2021
    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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Chenkai MaoDepartment of Microbiology and Immunology, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Hanover, NH, USA.
Michael-Joseph GorbetDepartment of Physiological Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, OK, USA.
Akansha SinghDepartment of Physiological Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, OK, USA.
Ashish RanjanDepartment of Physiological Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, OK, USA.
Steven FieringDepartment of Microbiology and Immunology, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Hanover, NH, USA.
Oklahoma State University · USDartmouth College · US

Funding

Dual-pronged nano-drug delivery using plant virus-like particles.R01CA224605 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO · PI Nicole Franziska Steinmetz · 2017 to 2026
$4.0M
Bioprinting Plant Virus Nanoparticles for Immunotherapy and Relapse Prevention of Ovarian CancerR01CA253615 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO · PI CHEN, SHAOCHEN, FIERING, STEVEN · 2020 to 2024
$3.1M
Overcoming the immune-suppressive tumor microenvironment through in situ vaccination nanotechnology.U01CA218292 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO · PI FIERING, STEVEN, STEINMETZ, NICOLE FRANZISKA · 2017 to 2021
$3.0M
Novel focused ultrasound enhanced calreticulin-nanoparticle for immune primed melanoma immunotherapyR37CA239150 · NCI · UT SOUTHWESTERN MEDICAL CENTER · PI RANJAN, ASHISH · 2019 to 2025
$2.9M
Boosting therapeutic immunity against Ovarian Cancer through CD40/TLR agonistsF31CA134188 · NCI · DARTMOUTH COLLEGE · PI SCARLETT, UCIANE KIMBLE · 2009 to 2010
$77k
NCI NIH HHS F31 CA134188NCI NIH HHS R01 CA224605NCI NIH HHS R01 CA253615NCI NIH HHS R37 CA239150NCI NIH HHS U01 CA218292
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

FDA approval of anti-CTLA4 in 2011 for melanoma immunotherapy was paradigm shifting and dramatically accelerated cancer immunotherapy research. The investment and effort have been exceptionally large, with a commensurate impressive pace of discovery. Historical and current research has validated the following key points: tumors are recognized by the immune system; tumors develop an immunosuppressive environment which suppresses the antitumor immune response; successful immunotherapy must overcome that tumor-mediated immunosuppression. While cancer immunotherapy research expanded, a parallel effort developing nanoparticles (NP) for cancer diagnosis and therapy also received major investment and expanded. Initially the two efforts appeared to have minimal synergy. Systemically administered nanoparticles are rapidly ingested by phagocytic leukocytes, and therefore nanotechnologists developed strategies to avoid NP ingestion by leukocytes in order to accomplish nanoparticle accumulation in tumors rather than liver and spleen. Recently, nanotechnology and cancer immunotherapy have increasingly merged since phagocytic leukocytes are the key to reversing the local tumor immunosuppression and the tendency of NP to be phagocytosed can be exploited to manipulate phagocytes for immunotherapy. This review focuses on

Indexed as

MelanomaNanoparticlesNeoplasmsHumansImmunotherapyVaccinationcancer immunotherapyIn situ vaccinationnanoparticlesnanotechnology

Identifiers

PMID33455477
PMCPMC8189648
OpenAlexW3124196543

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.