Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40121030›Full record

ArticleJournal for immunotherapy of cancer2025

A SITC vision: adapting clinical trials to accelerate drug development in cancer immunotherapy.

Thomas U Marron, Jason J Luke, Brianna Hoffner, Jane Perlmutter, Connie Szczepanek, Valsamo Anagnostou, Ann W Silk, Pedro J Romero, Elizabeth Garrett-Mayer, Leisha A Emens

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal for immunotherapy of cancer, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Translational 3DFrontiers in immunology · 2026
    Article
  5. 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

10 authors.

Thomas U MarronTisch Cancer Center, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York, USA.
Jason J LukeUPMC Hillman Cancer Center, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1182-4908
Brianna HoffnerAdvanced Practitioner Society for Hematology and Oncology, Hightstown, New Jersey, USA.
Jane PerlmutterGemini Group, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.
Connie SzczepanekCancer Research Consortium of West Michigan (CRCWM), Grand Rapids, Michigan, USA.
Valsamo AnagnostouSidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9480-3047
Ann W SilkDepartment of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3877-3984
Pedro J RomeroNovigenix SA, Epalinges, Switzerland.
Elizabeth Garrett-MayerCenter for Research and Analytics, American Society of Clinical Oncology, Alexandria, Virginia, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4709-0333
Leisha A EmensKaiser Permanente, South Sacramento, California, USA emensle@icloud.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Clinical trials of cancer immunotherapy (IO) were historically based on a drug development paradigm built for chemotherapies. The remarkable clinical activity of programmed cell death protein 1/programmed death ligand 1 blockade, chimeric antigen receptor-T cells, and T cell engagers yielded new insights into how the mechanistic underpinnings of IO are reflected in the clinic. These insights and the sheer number of novel immunotherapies currently in the pipeline have made it clear that our strategies and tools for IO drug development must adapt. Recent innovations like engineered T cells and tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes demonstrate that immune-based treatments may rely on real-time manufacturing programs rather than off-the-shelf drugs. We now recognize adoptively transferred cells as living drugs. Progression criteria have been redefined due to the unique response patterns of IO. Harnessing the power of both biomarkers and the neoadjuvant setting earlier in drug development is of broad interest. The US Food and Drug Association is increasingly impacting the design of trials with respect to dose optimization and clinical endpoints. The use of novel endpoints such as pathologic complete/major response, treatment-free survival, and minimal residual disease is becoming more common. There is growing acceptance of using patient-reported outcomes as trial endpoints to better measure the true clinical benefit and impact of novel IO agents on quality of life. New opportunities created by modern data science and artificial intelligence to inform and accelerate drug development continue to emerge. The importance of streamlining the clinical research ecosystem and enhancing clinical trial access to facilitate the enrollment of diverse patient populations is broadly recognized. Patient advocacy is critical both to drive the science of IO, and to promote patient satisfaction. To capitalize on these opportunities, the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) has established a goal of at least 100 new, unique IO approvals over the next 10 years. Accordingly, SITC has developed initiatives designed to integrate the viewpoints of diverse stakeholders and galvanize the field in further adapting clinical trials to the unique features of IO, moving us closer to our ultimate goal of using IO to cure and prevent cancer.

Indexed as

Clinical Trials as TopicDrug DevelopmentImmunotherapyNeoplasmsHumansAdoptive cell therapy - ACTBiomarkerImmune Checkpoint InhibitorPatient reported outcome - PROTumor microenvironment - TME

Identifiers

PMID40121030
PMCPMC11931932

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.