ReviewGenes2023
Unlocking Dendritic Cell-Based Vaccine Efficacy through Genetic Modulation-How Soon Is Now?
Review in Genes, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Ablation-immunotherapy synergy in cancer: mechanisms of the abscopal effect, emerging clinical applications, and translational roadmaps for next-generation onco-immunology.Medical oncology (Northwood, London, England) · 2026Review
- Extracorporeal Photopheresis: Does It Have a Potential Place Among Cell-based Therapies?Transplantation direct · 2025Article
- Synergistic Antitumor Effects of Caerin Peptides and Dendritic Cell Vaccines in a 4T-1 Murine Breast Cancer Model.Vaccines · 2025Article
- Current Development of Therapeutic Vaccines in Lung Cancer.Vaccines · 2025Review
- Tumor Vaccines for Malignant Melanoma: Progress, Challenges, and Future Directions.Oncology research · 2025Review
- Article
- New insights for the development of efficient DNA vaccines.Microbial biotechnology · 2024Review
- Innovative Drug Modalities for the Treatment of Advanced Prostate Cancer.Diseases (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The dendritic cell (DC) vaccine anti-cancer strategy involves tumour-associated antigen loading and maturation of autologous ex vivo cultured DCs, followed by infusion into the cancer patient. This strategy stemmed from the idea that to induce a robust anti-tumour immune response, it was necessary to bypass the fundamental immunosuppressive mechanisms of the tumour microenvironment that dampen down endogenous innate immune cell activation and enable tumours to evade immune attack. Even though the feasibility and safety of DC vaccines have long been confirmed, clinical response rates remain disappointing. Hence, the full potential of DC vaccines has yet to be reached. Whether this cellular-based vaccination approach will fully realise its position in the immunotherapy arsenal is yet to be determined. Attempts to increase DC vaccine immunogenicity will depend on increasing our understanding of DC biology and the signalling pathways involved in antigen uptake, maturation, migration, and T lymphocyte priming to identify amenable molecular targets to improve DC vaccine performance. This review evaluates various genetic engineering strategies that have been employed to optimise and boost the efficacy of DC vaccines.
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.