Clinical Insights and Future Prospects: A Comprehensive Narrative Review on Immunomodulation Induced by Electrochemotherapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Electrochemotherapy (ECT) is an emerging therapeutic approach gaining growing interest for its potential immunomodulatory effects in cancer treatment. This narrative review systematically examines the current state of knowledge regarding the interplay between ECT and the immune system. Through an analysis of preclinical and clinical studies, the review highlights ECT capacity to induce immunogenic cell death, activate dendritic cells, release tumor antigens, trigger inflammatory responses, and occasionally manifest systemic effects-the abscopal phenomenon. These mechanisms collectively suggest the ECT potential to influence both local tumor control and immune responses. While implications for clinical practice appear promising, warranting the consideration of ECT as a complementary treatment to immunotherapy, the evidence remains preliminary. Consequently, further research is needed to elucidate the underlying mechanisms, optimize treatment protocols, explore potential synergies, and decipher the parameters influencing the abscopal effect. As the field advances, the integration of ECT's potential immunomodulatory aspects into clinical practice will need careful evaluation and collaboration among clinical practitioners, researchers, and policymakers.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".