MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3180312866 · doi:10.3390/cancers13143400

Advances in Immunotherapy for Adult Glioblastoma

2021· review· en· W3180312866 on OpenAlexaff
Chirayu Chokshi, Benjamin Brakel, Nazanin Tatari, Neil Savage, Sabra K. Salim, Chitra Venugopal, Sheila K. Singh

Bibliographic record

VenueCancers · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlioma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImmunotherapyChimeric antigen receptorImmune systemGlioblastomaTumor microenvironmentMedicineBrain tumorModalitiesImmunologyGliomaCancer researchOncologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite aggressive multimodal therapy, glioblastoma (GBM) remains the most common malignant primary brain tumor in adults. With the advent of therapies that revitalize the anti-tumor immune response, several immunotherapeutic modalities have been developed for treatment of GBM. In this review, we summarize recent clinical and preclinical efforts to evaluate vaccination strategies, immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) and chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cells. Although these modalities have shown long-term tumor regression in subsets of treated patients, the underlying biology that may predict efficacy and inform therapy development is being actively investigated. Common to all therapeutic modalities are fundamental mechanisms of therapy evasion by tumor cells, including immense intratumoral heterogeneity, suppression of the tumor immune microenvironment and low mutational burden. These insights have led efforts to design rational combinatorial therapies that can reignite the anti-tumor immune response, effectively and specifically target tumor cells and reliably decrease tumor burden for GBM patients.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.025
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.340 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations15
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancersSame topicGlioma Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207