ReviewBritish journal of cancer2023
Quantitative multiplexed imaging technologies for single-cell analysis to assess predictive markers for immunotherapy in thoracic immuno-oncology: promises and challenges.
Review in British journal of cancer, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Biomarker Out of Context: Understanding High p-tau217 in the Developing Brain.Molecular neurobiology · 2026Review
- Immune checkpoint inhibitors in dMMR-MSI-H colorectal cancer: rationale, progress and prospects.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
- The cancer-testis lncRNA LINC01940 promotes gastric cancer malignant progression and chemoresistance by enhancing ribosome biogenesis via TAF15-mediated NOL11 SUMOylation.Cellular & molecular biology letters · 2025Article
- Current challenges and practical aspects of molecular pathology for non-small cell lung cancers.Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The past decade has witnessed a revolution in cancer treatment by the shift from conventional drugs (chemotherapies) towards targeted molecular therapies and immune-based therapies, in particular the immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). These immunotherapies selectively release the host immune system against the tumour and have shown unprecedented durable remission for patients with cancers that were thought incurable such as advanced non-small cell lung cancer (aNSCLC). The prediction of therapy response is based since the first anti-PD-1/PD-L1 molecules FDA and EMA approvals on the level of PD-L1 tumour cells expression evaluated by immunohistochemistry, and recently more or less on tumour mutation burden in the USA. However, not all aNSCLC patients benefit from immunotherapy equally, since only around 30% of them received ICIs and among them 30% have an initial response to these treatments. Conversely, a few aNSCLC patients could have an efficacy ICIs response despite low PD-L1 tumour cells expression. In this context, there is an urgent need to look for additional robust predictive markers for ICIs efficacy in thoracic oncology. Understanding of the mechanisms that enable cancer cells to adapt to and eventually overcome therapy and identifying such mechanisms can help circumvent resistance and improve treatment. However, more than a unique universal marker, the evaluation of several molecules in the tumour at the same time, particularly by using multiplex immunostaining is a promising open room to optimise the selection of patients who benefit from ICIs. Therefore, urgent further efforts are needed to optimise to individualise immunotherapy based on both patient-specific and tumour-specific characteristics. This review aims to rethink the role of multiplex immunostaining in immuno-thoracic oncology, with the current advantages and limitations in the near-daily practice use.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.