↓ Skip to main content

Does patient age influence anti-cancer immunity?

Overview of attention for article published in Seminars in Immunopathology, July 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
61 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
54 Mendeley
Title
Does patient age influence anti-cancer immunity?
Published in
Seminars in Immunopathology, July 2018
DOI 10.1007/s00281-018-0697-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Graham Pawelec

Abstract

Geriatric oncology, important for the ever-increasing numbers of elderly cancer patients, has thus far focused primarily on tolerance to chemotherapy. With the advent of breakthrough immunomodulatory antibody treatments relying on the patient's own immune system to control the tumor, the issue of immunosenescence becomes extremely important. There is increasingly a valid concern that anti-cancer immunity may be compromised in the elderly due to (i) their low amounts of naïve T cells (potentially leading to holes in the repertoire for neoantigens), (ii) "exhaustion" of potentially tumor-specific memory T cells, and (iii) higher amounts of suppressive cells. Encouragingly, but only anecdotally, accumulated clinical experience suggests that advanced age does not result in poorer responses or greater toxicity in elderly patients treated with anti-CTLA-4 or anti-PD-1/PD-L1 antibodies. Here, I briefly contrast immune features of the elderly with the young, commonly referred to as "immunosenescence," and the influence of patient age on the outcome of checkpoint blockade. As newer agents are licensed, and new combinations tested, broader and more detailed studies focusing on the age question will be crucial and should be taken into consideration when designing clinical trials.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 54 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 54 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 9 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 9%
Student > Bachelor 3 6%
Professor 3 6%
Other 11 20%
Unknown 17 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 30%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 13%
Immunology and Microbiology 5 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 4%
Unspecified 1 2%
Other 3 6%
Unknown 20 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 17 March 2019.
All research outputs
#15,330,390
of 23,577,654 outputs
Outputs from Seminars in Immunopathology
#375
of 562 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#199,076
of 327,984 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Seminars in Immunopathology
#8
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,654 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 562 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% 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 327,984 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.