Immunotherapy for cancer has shown increasing success and there is ample evidence to expect that progress gleaned in immune targeting of adult cancers can be translated to pediatric oncology. This manuscript reviews principles that guide selection of targets for immunotherapy of cancer, emphasizing the similarities and distinctions between oncogene-inhibition targets and immune targets. It follows with a detailed review of molecules expressed by pediatric tumors that are already under study as immune targets or are good candidates for future studies of immune targeting. Distinctions are made between cell surface antigens that can be targeted in an MHC independent manner using antibodies, antibody derivatives, or chimeric antigen receptors versus intracellular antigens which must be targeted with MHC restricted T cell therapies. Among the most advanced immune targets for childhood cancer are CD19 and CD22 on hematologic malignancies, GD2 on solid tumors, and NY-ESO-1 expressed by a majority of synovial sarcomas, but several other molecules reviewed here also have properties which suggest that they too could serve as effective targets for immunotherapy of childhood cancer.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 10 July 2019.
All research outputs
#3,415,054
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in oncology
#1,073
of 22,416 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#25,687
of 250,087 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in oncology
#17
of 161 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 22,416 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 250,087 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 161 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.
