Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38045830›Full record

ReviewMedComm2023

Biomarkers and experimental models for cancer immunology investigation.

Hengyi Xu, Ziqi Jia, Fengshuo Liu, Jiayi Li, Yansong Huang, Yiwen Jiang, Pengming Pu, Tongxuan Shang, Pengrui Tang, Yongxin Zhou and 3 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in MedComm, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing 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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

13 authors.

Hengyi XuState Key Laboratory of Molecular Oncology National Cancer Center /National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College Beijing China.
Ziqi JiaDepartment of Breast Surgical Oncology National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College Beijing China.
Fengshuo LiuEight-year MD Program School of Clinical Medicine, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College Beijing China.
Jiayi LiEight-year MD Program School of Clinical Medicine, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College Beijing China.
Yansong HuangEight-year MD Program School of Clinical Medicine, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College Beijing China.
Yiwen JiangEight-year MD Program School of Clinical Medicine, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College Beijing China.
Pengming PuEight-year MD Program School of Clinical Medicine, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College Beijing China.
Tongxuan ShangEight-year MD Program School of Clinical Medicine, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College Beijing China.
Pengrui TangEight-year MD Program School of Clinical Medicine, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College Beijing China.
Yongxin ZhouEight-year MD Program School of Clinical Medicine, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College Beijing China.
Yufan YangSchool of Medicine Tsinghua University Beijing China.
Jianzhong SuOujiang Laboratory Zhejiang Lab for Regenerative Medicine, Vision, and Brain Health Wenzhou Zhejiang China.
Jiaqi LiuState Key Laboratory of Molecular Oncology National Cancer Center /National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College Beijing China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The rapid advancement of tumor immunotherapies poses challenges for the tools used in cancer immunology research, highlighting the need for highly effective biomarkers and reproducible experimental models. Current immunotherapy biomarkers encompass surface protein markers such as PD-L1, genetic features such as microsatellite instability, tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes, and biomarkers in liquid biopsy such as circulating tumor DNAs. Experimental models, ranging from 3D in vitro cultures (spheroids, submerged models, air-liquid interface models, organ-on-a-chips) to advanced 3D bioprinting techniques, have emerged as valuable platforms for cancer immunology investigations and immunotherapy biomarker research. By preserving native immune components or coculturing with exogenous immune cells, these models replicate the tumor microenvironment in vitro. Animal models like syngeneic models, genetically engineered models, and patient-derived xenografts provide opportunities to study in vivo tumor-immune interactions. Humanized animal models further enable the simulation of the human-specific tumor microenvironment. Here, we provide a comprehensive overview of the advantages, limitations, and prospects of different biomarkers and experimental models, specifically focusing on the role of biomarkers in predicting immunotherapy outcomes and the ability of experimental models to replicate the tumor microenvironment. By integrating cutting-edge biomarkers and experimental models, this review serves as a valuable resource for accessing the forefront of cancer immunology investigation.

Indexed as

biomarkercancer immunotherapyexperimental modellab‐on‐a‐chip devicesthree‐dimensional model

Identifiers

PMID38045830
PMCPMC10693314

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.