ReviewFrontiers in immunology2024
Neoantigen prioritization based on antigen processing and presentation.
Review in Frontiers in immunology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Targeting DNA damage response to enhance cancer immunotherapy efficacy: molecular mechanisms and clinical advances.Medical oncology (Northwood, London, England) · 2025Pooled it
- Beyond the genetic code: orchestrating epigenetic and immune landscapes with multivalent mRNA-exosome vaccines.Precision clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Immunoediting and precision biomarkers in prostate cancer: The emerging role of liquid biopsy, immune contexture and HLA genotype (Review).International journal of oncology · 2026Review
- Association Between Oral Lichen Planus and Non-Oral Cancers: A Multicentre Case-Control SIPMO Study.Oral diseases · 2026Article
- Identification of public neoantigens with broad HLA class I coverage as candidates for off-the-shelf cancer vaccine development in colorectal cancer.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Article
- Safety-first TCR-T: AI-guided specificity, base-editing to prevent mispairing, and prioritizing public neoantigens.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Article
- Metabolomic and transcriptomic profiling of HNSCC identifies AMIGO2 as a therapeutic target modulating tumor microenvironment.NPJ precision oncology · 2025Article
- Elucidating DNA Damage-Dependent Immune System Activation.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- NeoTImmuML: a machine learning-based prediction model for human tumor neoantigen immunogenicity.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Somatic mutations in tumor cells give rise to mutant proteins, fragments of which are often presented by MHC and serve as neoantigens. Neoantigens are tumor-specific and not expressed in healthy tissues, making them attractive targets for T-cell-based cancer immunotherapy. On the other hand, since most somatic mutations differ from patient to patient, neoantigen-targeted immunotherapy is personalized medicine and requires their identification in each patient. Computational algorithms and machine learning methods have been developed to prioritize neoantigen candidates. In fact, since the number of clinically relevant neoantigens present in a patient is generally limited, this process is like finding a needle in a haystack. Nevertheless, MHC presentation of neoantigens is not random but follows certain rules, and the efficiency of neoantigen detection may be further improved with technological innovations. In this review, we discuss current approaches to the detection of clinically relevant neoantigens, with a focus on antigen processing and presentation.
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.