ArticleMed (New York, N.Y.)2023
Cancer vaccines are back, revitalized.
Article in Med (New York, N.Y.), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Developing neoantigen cancer vaccines: where are we now?Nature communications · 2026Review
- Recent Advances in Cancer Immunotherapy with a Focus on FDA-Approved Vaccines and Neoantigen-Based Vaccines.Vaccines · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
- Comment on
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
Cancer vaccines are beginning to deliver positive clinical results, particularly in the adjuvant setting with lipo-nanoparticle mRNA formulations used to elicit neoantigen responses. In a recent report in Nature, Rojas et al. show this may even be possible in patients with pancreatic cancer.
Indexed as
Identifiers
37453413What 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.