| Title |
Advances in T-cell checkpoint immunotherapy for head and neck squamous cell carcinoma
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
OncoTargets and therapy, December 2017
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ott.s148182 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Xinmeng Qi, Bo Jia, Xue Zhao, Dan Yu |
| Abstract |
Head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) has been found to be a complex group of malignancies characterized by their profound immunosuppression and high aggressiveness. In most cases of advanced HNSCC, treatment fails to obtain total cancer cure. Efforts are needed to develop new therapeutic approaches to improve HNSCC outcomes. In this light, T-cells "immune checkpoint" has attracted much attention in cancer immunotherapy. It has been broadly accepted that inhibitory T-cell immune checkpoints contribute to tumor immune escape through negative immune regulatory signals (cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated antigen 4 [CTLA-4], programmed cell death 1 [PD-1], B7-H3, and B7-H4, etc). Current data suggest that PD-1 and CTLA-4 receptors can inhibit T-cell receptors and T-cell proliferation. Blockade of PD-1/PD-L1 and/or CTLA-4/CD28 pathways has shown promising tumor outcomes in clinical trials for advanced solid tumors like melanoma, renal cell cancer, and non-small cell lung cancer. The present review attempts to explore what is known about PD-1/PD-L1 and CTLA-4/CD28 pathways with a focus on HNSCC. We further discuss how these pathways can be manipulated with therapeutic intent. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 59 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 59 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 13 | 22% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 6 | 10% |
| Other | 5 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 7% |
| Researcher | 4 | 7% |
| Other | 11 | 19% |
| Unknown | 16 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 20 | 34% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 8 | 14% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 3 | 5% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 5 | 8% |
| Unknown | 19 | 32% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 December 2019.
All research outputs
#7,284,188
of 25,604,262 outputs
Outputs from OncoTargets and therapy
#368
of 3,012 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#132,147
of 446,361 outputs
Outputs of similar age from OncoTargets and therapy
#7
of 73 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,604,262 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,012 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 446,361 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 73 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.