Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34502307›Full record

ReviewInternational journal of molecular sciences2021

Immune Checkpoint Therapy: Tumor Draining Lymph Nodes in the Spotlights.

Marieke F Fransen, Thorbald van Hall, Ferry Ossendorp

Abstract 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 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing 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

23 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Dynamic evolution and antitumor mechanisms of CXCR6Journal of translational medicine · 2025
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Diversity of Memory CD8International journal of molecular and cellular medicine · 2024
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Expansion of circulating stem-like CD8Nature communications · 2023
    Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Cyanine Phototruncation Enables Spatiotemporal Cell Labeling.Journal of the American Chemical Society · 2022
    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

3 authors.

Marieke F FransenDepartment of Immunology, Leiden University Medical Center (LUMC), 2300 RC Leiden, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-3036-8618
Thorbald van HallDepartment of Medical Oncology, Leiden University Medical Center (LUMC), 2300 RC Leiden, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-9115-558X
Ferry OssendorpDepartment of Immunology, Leiden University Medical Center (LUMC), 2300 RC Leiden, The Netherlands.

Funding

KWF Kankerbestrijding UL 2014-6828
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Tumor-draining lymph nodes play a paradoxical role in cancer. Surgeons often resect these sentinel lymph nodes to determine metastatic spread, thereby enabling prognosis and treatment. However, lymph nodes are vital organs for the orchestration of immune responses, due to the close encounters of dedicated immune cells. In view of the success of immunotherapy, the removal of tumor-draining lymph nodes needs to be re-evaluated and viewed in a different light. Recently, an important role for tumor-draining lymph nodes has been proposed in the immunotherapy of cancer. This new insight can change the use of immune checkpoint therapy, particularly with respect to the use in neoadjuvant settings in which lymph nodes are still operational.

Indexed as

AnimalsHumansImmune Checkpoint InhibitorsImmunotherapyLymphocytes, Tumor-InfiltratingNeoadjuvant TherapyNeoplasmsSentinel Lymph NodeImmune Checkpoint Inhibitorscancercheckpoint blockersimmunotherapyneoadjuvanttumor-draining lymph nodes

Identifiers

PMID34502307
PMCPMC8431673

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.