Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37623021›Full record

ReviewCurrent oncology (Toronto, Ont.)2023

Immunotherapy during the Immediate Perioperative Period: A Promising Approach against Metastatic Disease.

Elad Sandbank, Anabel Eckerling, Adam Margalit, Liat Sorski, Shamgar Ben-Eliyahu

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
3.1field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Biologic immunomodulators and spinal fusion: evidence, mechanisms, and perioperative considerations.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2026
    Review
  5. Biologic immunomodulators and spinal fusion: evidence, mechanisms, and perioperative considerations.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2026
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Elad SandbankNeuro-Immunology Research Unit, School of Psychological Sciences, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv 69978, Israel.ORCID 0000-0003-3374-5052
Anabel EckerlingNeuro-Immunology Research Unit, School of Psychological Sciences, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv 69978, Israel.ORCID 0000-0002-6530-9346
Adam MargalitSagol School of Neuroscience, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv 69978, Israel.
Liat SorskiNeuro-Immunology Research Unit, School of Psychological Sciences, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv 69978, Israel.
Shamgar Ben-EliyahuNeuro-Immunology Research Unit, School of Psychological Sciences, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv 69978, Israel.
Tel Aviv University · IL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Tumor excision is a necessary life-saving procedure in most solid cancers. However, surgery and the days before and following it, known as the immediate perioperative period (IPP), entail numerous prometastatic processes, including the suppression of antimetastatic immunity and direct stimulation of minimal residual disease (MRD). Thus, the IPP is pivotal in determining long-term cancer outcomes, presenting a short window of opportunity to circumvent perioperative risk factors by employing several therapeutic approaches, including immunotherapy. Nevertheless, immunotherapy is rarely examined or implemented during this short timeframe, due to both established and hypothetical contraindications to surgery. Herein, we analyze how various aspects of the IPP promote immunosuppression and progression of MRD, and how potential IPP application of immunotherapy may interact with these deleterious processes. We discuss the feasibility and safety of different immunotherapies during the IPP with a focus on the latest approaches of immune checkpoint inhibition. Last, we address the few past and ongoing clinical trials that exploit the IPP timeframe for anticancer immunotherapy. Accordingly, we suggest that several specific immunotherapies can be safely and successfully applied during the IPP, alone or with supporting interventions, which may improve patients' resistance to MRD and overall survival.

Indexed as

NeoplasmsNeoplasms, Second PrimaryHumansImmunotherapyRisk Factorsimmediate perioperative periodimmune checkpoint inhibitorsimmunotherapysurgery

Identifiers

PMID37623021
PMCPMC10453707
OpenAlexW4385650512

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.