MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4323825532 · doi:10.26685/urncst.449

Current Immunotherapy Techniques for Cancer Treatment: A Scoping Review

2023· review· en· W4323825532 on OpenAlexaff
Liliane Kreuder

Bibliographic record

VenueUndergraduate Research in Natural and Clinical Science and Technology (URNCST) Journal · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicImmunotherapy and Immune Responses
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImmunotherapyCancerCancer immunotherapyImmune systemMedicineImmunologyOncologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Immunotherapy, or the utilization of the immune system in fighting cancer, has been of interest as of late. Many different immunotherapy strategies exist, such as modifying T cells, generating cancer vaccines, as well as using chemokines, to elicit a strong anti-tumor response. As a strong emerging field in cancer research, this paper aims to conduct a scoping review to investigate the current research in immunotherapy targeting cancer and to summarize popular methods versus under-researched topics in the field. Methods: This scoping review follows PRISMA. Articles were found using MEDLINE, Scopus, and EMBASE, and were then screened using inclusion and exclusion criteria using the title and abstracts and then the full text. After the screening stage, papers chosen were categorized depending upon the authors’ main method of adapting the immune system to target cancer. Results: A total of 194 articles were included in this review. From the 194 articles, the method with the greatest amount of research in adapting the immune system to attack cancer are CAR-T cells, with 31 articles (16.0%). The second greatest category was cancer vaccines (28 articles; 14.4%), the third largest was other T cell-based immunotherapy strategies (25 articles; 12.9%) and the fourth largest was generating antibodies (24 articles; 12.4%). Other notable categories include cytokines and immune checkpoint inhibitors, while the smallest categories include bacteria, natural medicine, and nanoparticles. Discussion: The main fields of CAR-T cells, cancer vaccines, and antibodies commonly target tumor antigens involved in either tumor proliferation and progression or cancer invasion and metastasis. Further research is needed to demonstrate the strengths or limitations of using one immunotherapy technique over the other when it comes to inhibiting both of these cancer hallmarks. Furthermore, the review identifies multiple promising future avenues of immunotherapy that are currently less extensively investigated, such as adapting other immune cells, coupling immunotherapy techniques with nanoparticles, or using bacteria proteins to elicit a stronger immune response. Conclusion: This review aids in summarizing current focuses in the field of immunotherapy and provides future avenues and next steps for cancer research for new scientists pursuing a career in cancer research.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.038
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.065

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.038
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.005
Bibliometrics0.0210.019
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0060.005
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0040.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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 head0.193
GPT teacher head0.536
Teacher spread0.343 · 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 designSystematic review
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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUndergraduate Research in Natural and Clinical Science and Technology (URNCST) JournalSame topicImmunotherapy and Immune ResponsesFrench-language works237,207