Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38867074›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Cancer2024

Defining clinically useful biomarkers of immune checkpoint inhibitors in solid tumours.

Ashley M Holder, Aikaterini Dedeilia, Kailan Sierra-Davidson, Sonia Cohen, David Liu, Aparna Parikh, Genevieve M Boland

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Cancer, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 220 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
220citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
–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

220 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. The Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors Journey: From Early Promise to Lasting Impact.Journal of immunotherapy and precision oncology · 2026
    Review
  16. Article
  17. The immunology of human breast cancer.Nature reviews. Immunology · 2026
    Review
  18. ClonalLife science alliance · 2026
    Article
  19. Review
  20. Review

160 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

7 authors.

Ashley M HolderDepartment of Surgical Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6506-5871
Aikaterini DedeiliaDepartment of Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9429-246X
Kailan Sierra-DavidsonDepartment of Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
Sonia CohenDepartment of Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
David LiuDana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA.
Aparna ParikhCancer Center, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5245-7841
Genevieve M BolandDepartment of Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA. gmboland@mgh.harvard.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7522-6173

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Although more than a decade has passed since the approval of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) for the treatment of melanoma and non-small-cell lung, breast and gastrointestinal cancers, many patients still show limited response. US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved biomarkers include programmed cell death 1 ligand 1 (PDL1) expression, microsatellite status (that is, microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H)) and tumour mutational burden (TMB), but these have limited utility and/or lack standardized testing approaches for pan-cancer applications. Tissue-based analytes (such as tumour gene signatures, tumour antigen presentation or tumour microenvironment profiles) show a correlation with immune response, but equally, these demonstrate limited efficacy, as they represent a single time point and a single spatial assessment. Patient heterogeneity as well as inter- and intra-tumoural differences across different tissue sites and time points represent substantial challenges for static biomarkers. However, dynamic biomarkers such as longitudinal biopsies or novel, less-invasive markers such as blood-based biomarkers, radiomics and the gut microbiome show increasing potential for the dynamic identification of ICI response, and patient-tailored predictors identified through neoadjuvant trials or novel ex vivo tumour models can help to personalize treatment. In this Perspective, we critically assess the multiple new static, dynamic and patient-specific biomarkers, highlight the newest consortia and trial efforts, and provide recommendations for future clinical trials to make meaningful steps forwards in the field.

Indexed as

Biomarkers, TumorImmune Checkpoint InhibitorsNeoplasmsHumansMicrosatellite InstabilityTumor MicroenvironmentBiomarkers, TumorImmune Checkpoint Inhibitors

Identifiers

PMID38867074

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.