Title |
Combining surgery and immunotherapy: turning an immunosuppressive effect into a therapeutic opportunity
|
---|---|
Published in |
Journal for Immunotherapy of Cancer, September 2018
|
DOI | 10.1186/s40425-018-0398-7 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Orneala Bakos, Christine Lawson, Samuel Rouleau, Lee-Hwa Tai |
Abstract |
Cancer surgery is necessary and life-saving. However, the majority of patients develop postoperative recurrence and metastasis, which are the main causes of cancer-related deaths. The postoperative stress response encompasses a broad set of physiological changes that have evolved to safeguard the host following major tissue trauma. These stress responses, however, intersect with cellular mediators and signaling pathways that contribute to cancer proliferation. MAIN: Previous descriptive and emerging mechanistic studies suggest that the surgery-induced prometastatic effect is linked to impairment of both innate and adaptive immunity. Existing studies that combine surgery and immunotherapies have revealed that this combination strategy is not straightforward and patients have experienced both therapeutic benefit and drawbacks. This review will specifically assess the immunological pathways that are disrupted by oncologic surgical stress and provide suggestions for rationally combining cancer surgery with immunotherapies to improve immune and treatment outcomes. Given the prevalence of surgery as frontline therapy for solid cancers, the emerging data on postoperative immunosuppression and the rapid development of immunotherapy for oncologic treatment, we believe that future targeted studies of perioperative immunotherapy are warranted. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United States | 23 | 28% |
Spain | 8 | 10% |
France | 7 | 9% |
Italy | 3 | 4% |
Australia | 3 | 4% |
United Kingdom | 2 | 2% |
Canada | 1 | 1% |
Austria | 1 | 1% |
Greece | 1 | 1% |
Other | 5 | 6% |
Unknown | 28 | 34% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 42 | 51% |
Scientists | 25 | 30% |
Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 13 | 16% |
Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 2% |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Unknown | 108 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Bachelor | 16 | 15% |
Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 10% |
Researcher | 11 | 10% |
Student > Doctoral Student | 10 | 9% |
Other | 9 | 8% |
Other | 20 | 19% |
Unknown | 31 | 29% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Medicine and Dentistry | 34 | 31% |
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 14 | 13% |
Immunology and Microbiology | 9 | 8% |
Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 8 | 7% |
Engineering | 2 | 2% |
Other | 5 | 5% |
Unknown | 36 | 33% |