ReviewInternational journal of infectious diseases : IJID : official publication of the International Society for Infectious Diseases2026
Cancer and COVID-19: A review of immune insights and partnerships to inform public health strategy.
Review in International journal of infectious diseases : IJID : official publication of the International Society for Infectious Diseases, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo summarize current evidence on SARS-CoV-2 vaccine immunogenicity in cancer populations, review the experimental approaches and assays used to evaluate multilayer immunity, and highlight emerging collaborative efforts that support more standardized and comprehensive immune profiling.
methodsWe reviewed published clinical and immunological studies assessing vaccine-induced humoral, cellular, and mucosal immunity in hematologic and solid cancer populations, with attention to experimental approaches, assay standardization, and factors contributing to variability in immune readouts.
resultsCancer populations are highly vulnerable to respiratory viral infections (RVIs) due to disease- and treatment-related immunosuppression. SARS-CoV-2 is a particularly severe threat in this population and COVID-19 is associated with higher rates of hospitalization and mortality compared to immunocompetent individuals. Vaccination remains the most effective preventive method. However, immune responses to vaccination in cancer patients are often heterogeneous and weaker than in healthy populations. While booster doses can improve the protection, vaccine effectiveness wanes over time, and some patients may not respond well, with significant variability across cancer types, cancer status and treatment regimens. These observations highlight the importance of more personalized vaccination strategies informed by a thorough understanding of immune correlates of protection, including humoral, cellular, and mucosal immunity. Assessing different layers of immunity requires different experimental approaches, robust assay standardization and data harmonization. The collaborative efforts of consortia and the development of large, well-annotated biospecimen repositories can support high-resolution immune profiling, advance next-generation vaccine strategies and improve sustained protection against SARS-CoV-2 and other respiratory viruses in cancer populations.
conclusionsCancer populations show heterogeneous and often weaker vaccine-induced immunity, highlighting the need for more personalized vaccination strategies. Improving sustained protection requires a deeper understanding of multilayer immune responses and the use of robust, standardized assays that allow reliable comparisons across studies and patient groups.
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.