Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34151268›Full record

ReviewNeuro-oncology advances

Anti-PD-1 checkpoint blockade monotherapy in the orthotopic GL261 glioma model: the devil is in the detail.

Zachariah P Tritz, Katayoun Ayasoufi, Aaron J Johnson

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Neuro-oncology advances. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

18 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. [Theranostics · 2024
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. CD103Nature cancer · 2023
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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

3 authors.

Zachariah P TritzGraduate School of Biomedical Sciences, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5836-7839
Katayoun AyasoufiDepartment of Immunology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.
Aaron J JohnsonDepartment of Immunology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.

Funding

PHD TRAINING PROGRAM IN BASIC IMMUNOLOGYT32AI007425 · NIAID · MAYO CLINIC ROCHESTER · PI SHAPIRO, VIRGINIA SMITH · 1995 to 2020
$3.6M
NIAID NIH HHS T32 AI007425
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The GL261 cell line, syngeneic on the C57BL/6 background, has, since its establishment half a century ago in 1970, become the most commonly used immunocompetent murine model of glioblastoma. As immunotherapy has entered the mainstream of clinical discourse in the past decade, this model has proved its worth as a formidable opponent against various immunotherapeutic combinations. Although advances in surgical, radiological, and chemotherapeutic interventions have extended mean glioblastoma patient survival by several months, 5-year survival postdiagnosis remains below 5%. Immunotherapeutic interventions, such as the ones explored in the murine GL261 model, may prove beneficial for patients with glioblastoma. However, even common immunotherapeutic interventions in the GL261 model still have unclear efficacy, with wildly discrepant conclusions being made in the literature regarding this topic. Here, we focus on anti-PD-1 checkpoint blockade monotherapy as an example of this pattern. We contend that a fine-grained analysis of how biological variables (age, sex, tumor location, etc.) predict treatment responsiveness in this preclinical model will better enable researchers to identify glioblastoma patients most likely to benefit from checkpoint blockade immunotherapy moving forward.

Indexed as

Anti-PD-1GBMGL261

Identifiers

PMID34151268
PMCPMC8209580

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.