Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37563222›Full record

ReviewBritish journal of cancer2023

Advancing translational research for colorectal immuno-oncology.

Elaine M Thomas, Josephine A Wright, Stephen J Blake, Amanda J Page, Daniel L Worthley, Susan L Woods

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 30 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing 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

30 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Epigenetic plus cytokine therapy induces stem-like CD8Journal for immunotherapy of cancer · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. CEUS with VEGFR2-targeted microbubbles for monitoring of early immunotherapy effects in a colorectal cancer model.Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
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

6 authors.

Elaine M ThomasAdelaide Medical School, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA, Australia.
Josephine A WrightPrecision Cancer Medicine Theme, South Australian Health and Medical Research Institute, Adelaide, SA, Australia.
Stephen J BlakePrecision Cancer Medicine Theme, South Australian Health and Medical Research Institute, Adelaide, SA, Australia.
Amanda J PageSchool of Biomedicine, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA, Australia.
Daniel L WorthleyPrecision Cancer Medicine Theme, South Australian Health and Medical Research Institute, Adelaide, SA, Australia.
Susan L WoodsAdelaide Medical School, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA, Australia. susan.woods@adelaide.edu.au.ORCID 0000-0002-8955-2017

Funding

Bacterial biosensors for the prevention of gastrointestinal cancersR01CA241728 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO · PI JEFF M HASTY, ROB KNIGHT · 2020 to 2026
$4.2M
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA241728
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a common and deadly disease. Unfortunately, immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) fail to elicit effective anti-tumour responses in the vast majority of CRC patients. Patients that are most likely to respond are those with DNA mismatch repair deficient (dMMR) and microsatellite instability (MSI) disease. However, reliable predictors of ICI response are lacking, even within the dMMR/MSI subtype. This, together with identification of novel mechanisms to increase response rates and prevent resistance, are ongoing and vitally important unmet needs. To address the current challenges with translation of early research findings into effective therapeutic strategies, this review summarises the present state of preclinical testing used to inform the development of immuno-regulatory treatment strategies for CRC. The shortfalls and advantages of commonly utilised mouse models of CRC, including chemically induced, transplant and transgenic approaches are highlighted. Appropriate use of existing models, incorporation of patient-derived data and development of cutting-edge models that recapitulate important features of human disease will be key to accelerating clinically relevant research in this area.

Indexed as

Brain NeoplasmsColorectal NeoplasmsAnimalsDNA Mismatch RepairHumansMedical OncologyMiceMicrosatellite InstabilityNeoplastic Syndromes, HereditaryTranslational Research, Biomedical

Identifiers

PMID37563222
PMCPMC10628092

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.