ReviewWiley interdisciplinary reviews. Nanomedicine and nanobiotechnology2023
Immune-checkpoint inhibitor therapy response evaluation using oncophysics-based mathematical models.
Review in Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Nanomedicine and nanobiotechnology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Bridging BET bromodomain and immune checkpoint inhibitors through generative bioorganic frameworks for next-generation cancer immunotherapy.RSC medicinal chemistry · 2026Review
- Efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy-based control in cervical cancer: a meta-analysis.American journal of cancer research · 2026Review
- Practical Pharmacokinetic-Pharmacodynamic Models in Oncology.Pharmaceutics · 2025Review
- Investigating tumor-host response dynamics in preclinical immunotherapy experiments using a stepwise mathematical modeling strategy.Mathematical biosciences · 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
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The field of oncology has transformed with the advent of immunotherapies. The standard of care for multiple cancers now includes novel drugs that target key checkpoints that function to modulate immune responses, enabling the patient's immune system to elicit an effective anti-tumor response. While these immune-based approaches can have dramatic effects in terms of significantly reducing tumor burden and prolonging survival for patients, the therapeutic approach remains active only in a minority of patients and is often not durable. Multiple biological investigations have identified key markers that predict response to the most common form of immunotherapy-immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI). These biomarkers help enrich patients for ICI but are not 100% predictive. Understanding the complex interactions of these biomarkers with other pathways and factors that lead to ICI resistance remains a major goal. Principles of oncophysics-the idea that cancer can be described as a multiscale physical aberration-have shown promise in recent years in terms of capturing the essence of the complexities of ICI interactions. Here, we review the biological knowledge of mechanisms of ICI action and how these are incorporated into modern oncophysics-based mathematical models. Building on the success of oncophysics-based mathematical models may help to discover new, rational methods to engineer immunotherapy for patients in the future. This article is categorized under: Therapeutic Approaches and Drug Discovery > Nanomedicine for Oncologic Disease.
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.