Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37355722›Full record

ReviewBritish journal of cancer2023

Whole tumour cell-based vaccines: tuning the instruments to orchestrate an optimal antitumour immune response.

Amarilis Pérez-Baños, María Alejandra Gleisner, Iván Flores, Cristián Pereda, Mariela Navarrete, Juan Pablo Araya, Giovanna Navarro, Claudia Quezada-Monrás, Andrés Tittarelli, Flavio Salazar-Onfray

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in British journal of cancer, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 49 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
49citing 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

49 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Bacterialized tumor cells as vaccine.EMBO molecular medicine · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Oocyte-inspired universal whole-cell vaccines against tumor heterogeneity.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. 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

10 authors.

Amarilis Pérez-Baños *Disciplinary Program of Immunology, Institute of Biomedical Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, Universidad de Chile, Santiago, Chile.
María Alejandra Gleisner *Disciplinary Program of Immunology, Institute of Biomedical Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, Universidad de Chile, Santiago, Chile.
Iván FloresDisciplinary Program of Immunology, Institute of Biomedical Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, Universidad de Chile, Santiago, Chile.
Cristián PeredaDisciplinary Program of Immunology, Institute of Biomedical Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, Universidad de Chile, Santiago, Chile.
Mariela NavarreteDisciplinary Program of Immunology, Institute of Biomedical Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, Universidad de Chile, Santiago, Chile.
Juan Pablo ArayaDisciplinary Program of Immunology, Institute of Biomedical Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, Universidad de Chile, Santiago, Chile.
Giovanna NavarroMillennium Institute on Immunology and Immunotherapy, Faculty of Medicine, Universidad de Chile, Santiago, Chile.
Claudia Quezada-MonrásMillennium Institute on Immunology and Immunotherapy, Faculty of Medicine, Universidad de Chile, Santiago, Chile.
Andrés TittarelliPrograma Institucional de Fomento a la Investigación, Desarrollo e Innovación (PIDi), Universidad Tecnológica Metropolitana (UTEM), Santiago, Chile. atittarelli@utem.cl.
Flavio Salazar-OnfrayDisciplinary Program of Immunology, Institute of Biomedical Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, Universidad de Chile, Santiago, Chile. fsalazar@uchile.cl.ORCID 0000-0002-1848-5697

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Immunotherapy, particularly those based on immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), has become a useful approach for many neoplastic diseases. Despite the improvements of ICIs in supporting tumour regression and prolonging survival, many patients do not respond or develop resistance to treatment. Thus, therapies that enhance antitumour immunity, such as anticancer vaccines, constitute a feasible and promising therapeutic strategy. Whole tumour cell (WTC) vaccines have been extensively tested in clinical studies as intact or genetically modified cells or tumour lysates, injected directly or loaded on DCs with distinct adjuvants. The essential requirements of WTC vaccines include the optimal delivery of a broad battery of tumour-associated antigens, the presence of tumour cell-derived molecular danger signals, and adequate adjuvants. These factors trigger an early and robust local innate inflammatory response that orchestrates an antigen-specific and proinflammatory adaptive antitumour response capable of controlling tumour growth by several mechanisms. In this review, the strengths and weaknesses of our own and others' experiences in studying WTC vaccines are revised to discuss the essential elements required to increase anticancer vaccine effectiveness.

Indexed as

Cancer VaccinesNeoplasmsAntigens, NeoplasmHumansImmunityImmunotherapyAntigens, NeoplasmCancer Vaccines

Identifiers

PMID37355722
PMCPMC10421921

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.