Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34207103›Full record

ReviewInternational journal of molecular sciences2021

Ovarian Cancer Immunotherapy and Personalized Medicine.

Susan Morand, Monika Devanaboyina, Hannah Staats, Laura Stanbery, John Nemunaitis

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in International journal of molecular sciences, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 237 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
237citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
22.8field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

237 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 363 citations in OpenAlex.

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

177 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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Susan MorandDepartment of Medicine, University of Toledo, Toledo, OH 43614, USA.
Monika DevanaboyinaDepartment of Medicine, University of Toledo, Toledo, OH 43614, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-3198-6848
Hannah StaatsDepartment of Medicine, University of Toledo, Toledo, OH 43614, USA.
Laura StanberyGradalis, Inc., Carrollton, TX 75006, USA.
John NemunaitisGradalis, Inc., Carrollton, TX 75006, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-2234-2381
University of Toledo · USGradalis (United States) · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Ovarian cancer response to immunotherapy is limited; however, the evaluation of sensitive/resistant target treatment subpopulations based on stratification by tumor biomarkers may improve the predictiveness of response to immunotherapy. These markers include tumor mutation burden, PD-L1, tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes, homologous recombination deficiency, and neoantigen intratumoral heterogeneity. Future directions in the treatment of ovarian cancer include the utilization of these biomarkers to select ideal candidates. This paper reviews the role of immunotherapy in ovarian cancer as well as novel therapeutics and study designs involving tumor biomarkers that increase the likelihood of success with immunotherapy in ovarian cancer.

Indexed as

ImmunotherapyPrecision MedicineAntigens, NeoplasmBiomarkers, TumorClinical Trials as TopicDisease ManagementDisease SusceptibilityFemaleHumansMolecular Targeted TherapyOvarian NeoplasmsTreatment OutcomeAntigens, NeoplasmBiomarkers, Tumorbiomarkerimmunotherapyovarian cancer

Identifiers

PMID34207103
PMCPMC8234871
OpenAlexW3177399469

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.