Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37599903›Full record

ReviewImmunotherapy advances2023

Combination therapies for the optimisation of Bispecific T-cell Engagers in cancer treatment.

Winston M Zhu, Mark R Middleton

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Immunotherapy advances, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
7.4field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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

33 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 32 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Winston M ZhuOxford Medical School, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3171-938X
Mark R MiddletonDepartment of Oncology, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
University of Oxford · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Bispecific T-cell engagers (BiTEs) redirect endogenous T-cell populations to cells expressing tumour-associated antigens to induce tumour cell killing. This inherently relies upon a cytotoxic T-cell population that is able to be recruited. In many cancers, immune checkpoints and other immunosuppressive factors in the tumour microenvironment lead to a population of anergic T-cells which cannot be redirected to tumour killing and thus impede the efficacy of BiTE therapy. Furthermore, there is evidence that BiTE therapy itself can increase immune checkpoint expression, and this is thought to be a major escape mechanism for the BiTE therapy blinatumomab. To overcome these inadequate T-cell responses, BiTEs may be combined with checkpoint inhibitors, chemotherapy, costimulatory molecules or oncolytic viruses. Study of these combinations is needed to expand the use of BiTEs in solid malignancies. This review covers the rationale, preclinical evidence and any clinical trials for these combination therapies and a few other less-studied combinations.

Indexed as

bispecificcombinationimmunotherapyT-cell

Identifiers

PMID37599903
PMCPMC10439528
OpenAlexW4385713649

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.