ArticleHematology, transfusion and cell therapy
Production of dendritic cell vaccines using different methods with equivalent results: Implications for emerging centers.
Article in Hematology, transfusion and cell therapy. 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.
- Dendritic cells in hematologic malignancies: a brief review of immunoregulation to new perspectives.Biochemia medica · 2026Review
- Emerging immunotherapeutic strategies for malignant serous effusions: current evidence and future directions.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Review
- Dendritic cell-derived exosomes as anti-cancer cell-free agents: new insights into enhancing immunogenic effects.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Review
- Nanomaterial Delivery Vehicles for the Development of Neoantigen Tumor Vaccines for Personalized Treatment.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionDendritic cell (DC) vaccines have demonstrated good efficacy in preventing relapse and in increasing survival of patients affected by a variety of both solid and hematological tumors. Most protocols used to generate these cells involve the automated separation of peripheral blood monocytes from patients. This approach requires specialized equipment, which elevates the cost of this type of therapy, potentially limiting the widespread access to patients.
methodIn this study, we compare the yield and quality of dendritic cells generated from monocytes and isolated by an automated method or by manual methods using gradient centrifugation.
resultsThe results demonstrate the equivalence of the 3 methods in relation to the yield and final quality of the product, however with considerable differences between the costs of these procedures. In addition, this study also demonstrates the feasibility of the antigenic pulse with autologous tumor cell lysates, constituting a source of antigens, not only easily obtained and manipulated, but also specific to the patient's tumor.
conclusionThese findings may have important implications for emerging centers interested in using this medical approach and potentially increase the access of a greater number of patients to this therapeutic option.
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.