ArticleMedComm2023
Clinical benefit and safety associated with mRNA vaccines for advanced solid tumors: A meta-analysis.
Article in MedComm, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Results of a phase I/IIa trial of SV-BR-1-GM inoculation with low-dose cyclophosphamide and interferon alpha (Bria-IMT) in metastatic breast cancer.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2024Trial
- Review
- Breaking barriers in prostate cancer: the mRNA vaccine breakthrough and what comes next.NPJ vaccines · 2026Review
- Advances in mRNA LNP-Based Cancer Vaccines: Mechanisms, Formulation Aspects, Challenges, and Future Directions.Journal of personalized medicine · 2024Review
- Clinical benefit and safety associated with mRNA vaccines for advanced solid tumors: A meta-analysis.MedComm · 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
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Tumor mRNA vaccines have been developed for over 20 years. Whether mRNA vaccines could promote a clinical benefit to advanced cancer patients is highly unknown. PubMed and Embase were retrieved from January 1, 2000 to January 4, 2023. Random effects models were employed. Clinical benefit (objective response rate [ORR], disease control rate [DCR], 1-year/2-year progression-free survival [PFS], and overall survival [OS]) and safety (vaccine-related grade 3-5 adverse events [AEs]) were evaluated. Overall, 984 patients (32 trials) were enrolled. The most typical cancer types were melanoma (13 trials), non-small cell lung cancer (5 trials), renal cell carcinoma (4 trials), and prostate adenocarcinoma (4 trials). The pooled ORR and DCR estimates were 10.0% (95%CI, 4.6-17.0%) and 34.6% (95%CI, 24.1-45.9%). The estimates for 1-year and 2-year PFS were 38.4% (95%CI, 24.8-53.0%) and 20.0% (95%CI, 10.4-31.7%), respectively. The estimates for 1-year and 2-year OS were 75.3% (95%CI, 62.4-86.3%) and 45.5% (95%CI, 34.0-57.2%), respectively. The estimate for vaccine-related grade 3-5 AEs was 1.0% (95%CI, 0.2-2.4%). Conclusively, mRNA vaccines seem to demonstrate modest clinical response rates, with acceptable survival rates and rare grade 3-5 AEs.
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.