ReviewCancers2022
Engineered Microphysiological Systems for Testing Effectiveness of Cell-Based Cancer Immunotherapies.
Review in Cancers, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Vascular STING activation facilitates NK cell anti-tumor immunity in small cell lung cancer.Cancer cell · 2026Article
- Engineering immune-competent hair follicle microphysiological systems: from organoid assembly to dynamic immune modelling.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2026Review
- Engineering the Immune Response to Biomaterials.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2025Review
- Advances in modeling permeability and selectivity of the blood-brain barrier using microfluidics.Microfluidics and nanofluidics · 2024Article
- Cancer-on-a-chip model shows that the adenomatous polyposis coli mutation impairs T cell engagement and killing of cancer spheroids.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024Article
- Differential roles of normal and lung cancer-associated fibroblasts in microvascular network formation.APL bioengineering · 2024Article
- Patient-Derived Microphysiological Systems for Precision Medicine.Advanced healthcare materials · 2024Review
- Article
- Organ-on-a-chip technologies for biomedical research and drug development: A focus on the vasculature.Smart medicine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Cell therapies, including adoptive immune cell therapies and genetically engineered chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T or NK cells, have shown promise in treating hematologic malignancies. Yet, immune cell infiltration and expansion has proven challenging in solid tumors due to immune cell exclusion and exhaustion and the presence of vascular barriers. Testing next-generation immune therapies remains challenging in animals, motivating sophisticated ex vivo models of human tumor biology and prognostic assays to predict treatment response in real-time while comprehensively recapitulating the human tumor immune microenvironment (TIME). This review examines current strategies for testing cell-based cancer immunotherapies using ex vivo microphysiological systems and microfluidic technologies. Insights into the multicellular interactions of the TIME will identify novel therapeutic strategies to help patients whose tumors are refractory or resistant to current immunotherapies. Altogether, these microphysiological systems (MPS) have the capability to predict therapeutic vulnerabilities and biological barriers while studying immune cell infiltration and killing in a more physiologically relevant context, thereby providing important insights into fundamental biologic mechanisms to expand our understanding of and treatments for currently incurable malignancies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.