Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33919378›Full record

ReviewPharmaceutics2021

Cationic Nanoparticle-Based Cancer Vaccines.

Jeroen Heuts, Wim Jiskoot, Ferry Ossendorp, Koen van der Maaden

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Pharmaceutics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 42 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Emerging Cationic Nanovaccines.Pharmaceutics · 2024
    Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Jeroen HeutsDepartment of Immunology, Leiden University Medical Centre, 2300 RC Leiden, The Netherlands.
Wim JiskootDivision of BioTherapeutics, Leiden Academic Centre for Drug Research (LACDR), Leiden University, 2300 RA Leiden, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-1012-3456
Ferry OssendorpDepartment of Immunology, Leiden University Medical Centre, 2300 RC Leiden, The Netherlands.
Koen van der MaadenDepartment of Immunology, Leiden University Medical Centre, 2300 RC Leiden, The Netherlands.
Leiden University · NLLeiden University Medical Center · NL

Funding

H2020-MSCA-Intra European Fellowship-2018 832455-Need2immune
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cationic nanoparticles have been shown to be surprisingly effective as cancer vaccine vehicles in preclinical and clinical studies. Cationic nanoparticles deliver tumor-associated antigens to dendritic cells and induce immune activation, resulting in strong antigen-specific cellular immune responses, as shown for a wide variety of vaccine candidates. In this review, we discuss the relation between the cationic nature of nanoparticles and the efficacy of cancer immunotherapy. Multiple types of lipid- and polymer-based cationic nanoparticulate cancer vaccines with various antigen types (e.g., mRNA, DNA, peptides and proteins) and adjuvants are described. Furthermore, we focus on the types of cationic nanoparticles used for T-cell induction, especially in the context of therapeutic cancer vaccination. We discuss different cationic nanoparticulate vaccines, molecular mechanisms of adjuvanticity and biodistribution profiles upon administration via different routes. Finally, we discuss the perspectives of cationic nanoparticulate vaccines for improving immunotherapy of cancer.

Indexed as

cancerimmunotherapyliposomesnanoparticlespolymersvaccine

Identifiers

PMID33919378
PMCPMC8143365
OpenAlexW3152920546

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.