↓ Skip to main content

Adjuvants for peptide-based cancer vaccines

Overview of attention for article published in Journal for Immunotherapy of Cancer, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
133 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
225 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Adjuvants for peptide-based cancer vaccines
Published in
Journal for Immunotherapy of Cancer, September 2016
DOI 10.1186/s40425-016-0160-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hiep Khong, Willem W. Overwijk

Abstract

Cancer therapies based on T cells have shown impressive clinical benefit. In particular, immune checkpoint blockade therapies with anti-CTLA-4 and anti-PD-1/PD-L1 are causing dramatic tumor shrinkage and prolonged patient survival in a variety of cancers. However, many patients do not benefit, possibly due to insufficient spontaneous T cell reactivity against their tumors and/or lacking immune cell infiltration to tumor site. Such tumor-specific T cell responses could be induced through anti-cancer vaccination; but despite great success in animal models, only a few of many cancer vaccine trials have demonstrated robust clinical benefit. One reason for this difference may be the use of potent, effective vaccine adjuvants in animal models, vs. the use of safe, but very weak, vaccine adjuvants in clinical trials. As vaccine adjuvants dictate the type and magnitude of the T cell response after vaccination, it is critical to understand how they work to design safe, but also effective, cancer vaccines for clinical use. Here we discuss current insights into the mechanism of action and practical application of vaccine adjuvants, with a focus on peptide-based cancer vaccines.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 225 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 224 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 41 18%
Researcher 40 18%
Student > Bachelor 28 12%
Student > Master 21 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 15 7%
Other 24 11%
Unknown 56 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 45 20%
Immunology and Microbiology 36 16%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 23 10%
Medicine and Dentistry 20 9%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 10 4%
Other 30 13%
Unknown 61 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 12 February 2017.
All research outputs
#14,615,224
of 25,394,764 outputs
Outputs from Journal for Immunotherapy of Cancer
#2,350
of 3,428 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#171,543
of 328,014 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal for Immunotherapy of Cancer
#16
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,394,764 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,428 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.4. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 328,014 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.