Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34085677›Full record

ReviewLab on a chip2021

Microfluidic technologies for immunotherapy studies on solid tumours.

K Paterson, S Zanivan, R Glasspool, S B Coffelt, M Zagnoni

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Lab on a chip, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 41 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Leveraging Microphysiological Systems to Facilitate Neutrophil-Based Cancer Immunotherapy.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Microphysiological systems as models for immunologically 'cold' tumors.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2024
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. 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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

K PatersonCentre for Microsystems and Photonics, EEE Department, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, UK. michele.zagnoni@strath.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-7632-1308
S ZanivanInstitute of Cancer Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK and Cancer Research UK Beatson Institute, Glasgow, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-9880-9099
R GlasspoolInstitute of Cancer Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK and Beatson West of Scotland Cancer Centre, Glasgow, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-5000-1680
S B CoffeltInstitute of Cancer Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK and Cancer Research UK Beatson Institute, Glasgow, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-2257-2862
M ZagnoniCentre for Microsystems and Photonics, EEE Department, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, UK. michele.zagnoni@strath.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0003-3198-9491
Glasgow Life · GBUniversity of Strathclyde · GBBeatson West of Scotland Cancer Centre · GB

Funding

Breast Cancer Now 2018JULPR1101Cancer Research UK 29800Cancer Research UK A18076Cancer Research UK A25142Cancer Research UK A29800Cancer Research UK A31287Medical Research Council MR/R502327/1Wellcome TrustWellcome Trust 208990/Z/17/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Immunotherapy is a powerful and targeted cancer treatment that exploits the body's immune system to attack and eliminate cancerous cells. This form of therapy presents the possibility of long-term control and prevention of recurrence due to the memory capabilities of the immune system. Various immunotherapies are successful in treating haematological malignancies and have dramatically improved outcomes in melanoma. However, tackling other solid tumours is more challenging, mostly because of the immunosuppressive tumour microenvironment (TME). Current in vitro models based on traditional 2D cell monolayers and animal models, such as patient-derived xenografts, have limitations in their ability to mimic the complexity of the human TME. As a result, they have inadequate translational value and can be poorly predictive of clinical outcome. Thus, there is a need for robust in vitro preclinical tools that more faithfully recapitulate human solid tumours to test novel immunotherapies. Microfluidics and lab-on-a-chip technologies offer opportunities, especially when performing mechanistic studies, to understand the role of the TME in immunotherapy, and to expand the experimental throughput when using patient-derived tissue through its miniaturization capabilities. This review first introduces the basic concepts of immunotherapy, presents the current preclinical approaches used in immuno-oncology for solid tumours and then discusses the underlying challenges. We provide a rationale for using microfluidic-based approaches, highlighting the most recent microfluidic technologies and methodologies that have been used for studying cancer-immune cell interactions and testing the efficacy of immunotherapies in solid tumours. Ultimately, we discuss achievements and limitations of the technology, commenting on potential directions for incorporating microfluidic technologies in future immunotherapy studies.

Indexed as

MelanomaNeoplasmsAnimalsHumansImmunotherapyLab-On-A-Chip DevicesMicrofluidicsTumor Microenvironment

Identifiers

PMID34085677
PMCPMC8204114
OpenAlexW3164860194

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.