↓ Skip to main content

Anti-PD-1 and Anti-CTLA-4 Therapies in Cancer: Mechanisms of Action, Efficacy, and Limitations

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in oncology, March 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#11 of 22,738)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
53 news outlets
blogs
2 blogs
twitter
9 X users
patent
3 patents
wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
966 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
1460 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
Anti-PD-1 and Anti-CTLA-4 Therapies in Cancer: Mechanisms of Action, Efficacy, and Limitations
Published in
Frontiers in oncology, March 2018
DOI 10.3389/fonc.2018.00086
Pubmed ID
Authors

Judith A. Seidel, Atsushi Otsuka, Kenji Kabashima

Abstract

Melanoma, a skin cancer associated with high mortality rates, is highly radio- and chemotherapy resistant but can also be very immunogenic. These circumstances have led to a recent surge in research into therapies aiming to boost anti-tumor immune responses in cancer patients. Among these immunotherapies, neutralizing antibodies targeting the immune checkpoints T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 (CTLA-4) and programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) are being hailed as particularly successful. These antibodies have resulted in dramatic improvements in disease outcome and are now clinically approved in many countries. However, the majority of advanced stage melanoma patients do not respond or will relapse, and the hunt for the "magic bullet" to treat the disease continues. This review examines the mechanisms of action and the limitations of anti-PD-1/PD-L1 and anti-CTLA-4 antibodies which are the two types of checkpoint inhibitors currently available to patients and further explores the future avenues of their use in melanoma and other cancers.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 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 1,460 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 1460 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 239 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 202 14%
Student > Master 168 12%
Researcher 124 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 65 4%
Other 152 10%
Unknown 510 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 288 20%
Medicine and Dentistry 177 12%
Immunology and Microbiology 142 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 88 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 75 5%
Other 135 9%
Unknown 555 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 389. 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 22 February 2024.
All research outputs
#79,503
of 25,599,531 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in oncology
#11
of 22,738 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,928
of 344,863 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in oncology
#1
of 129 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,599,531 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 22,738 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 344,863 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 129 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 99% of its contemporaries.