Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40983713›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Immunology2026

Lessons from neoadjuvant immunotherapy in melanoma: understanding antitumour immunity and tumour escape.

Francesca Fallarino, Christian U Blank

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Immunology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
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

2 authors.

Francesca FallarinoUniversity of Perugia, Department of Medicine and Surgery, Perugia, Italy. francesca.fallarino@unipg.it.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8501-2136
Christian U BlankThe Netherlands Cancer Institute (NKI), Department of Medical Oncology and Division of Immunology, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. c.blank@nki.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7945-5846

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Immunotherapy has become a fourth pillar of cancer therapy, alongside surgery, radiotherapy and chemotherapy. Cancer immunotherapy seems to be most effective in the context of low but not negligible tumour burden, thus in the neoadjuvant setting before curative intent surgery. Indeed, in the case of macroscopic stage III melanoma, a decade of clinical and translational research has led to conclusive evidence that neoadjuvant immunotherapy should be the clinical standard of care, although its adoption in different regions of the world is still ongoing. In this Perspective, we discuss the lessons learnt from neoadjuvant immunotherapy trials in melanoma and where the field is heading next. In the coming years, we believe that biomarker-driven personalization of the therapy, a deeper understanding of the role of immune education, and the ability to uncouple toxicity from efficacy will make neoadjuvant cancer immunotherapy safer and more effective, not only for melanoma but also for other types of cancer.

Indexed as

ImmunotherapyMelanomaNeoadjuvant TherapyTumor EscapeAnimalsHumans

Identifiers

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.