1,721,065 research outputs found
The MAPK hypothesis: immune-regulatory effects of MAPK-pathway genetic dysregulations and implications for breast cancer immunotherapy
With the advent of checkpoint inhibition, immunotherapy has revolutionized the clinical management of several cancers, but has demonstrated limited efficacy in mammary carcinoma. Transcriptomic profiling of cancer samples defined distinct immunophenotypic categories characterized by different prognostic and predictive connotations. In breast cancer, genomic alterations leading to the dysregulation of mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathways have been linked to an immune-silent phenotype associated with poor outcome and treatment resistance. These aberrations include mutations of MAP3K1 and MAP2K4, amplification of KRAS, BRAF, and RAF1, and truncations of NF1. Anticancer therapies targeting MAPK signaling by BRAF and MEK inhibitors have demonstrated clear immunologic effects. These off-target properties could be exploited to convert the immune-silent tumor phenotype into an immune-active one. Preclinical evidence supports that MAPK-pathway inhibition can dramatically increase the efficacy of immunotherapy. In this review, we provide a detailed overview of the immunomodulatory impact of MAPK-pathway blockade through BRAF and MEK inhibitions. While BRAF inhibition might be relevant in melanoma only, MEK inhibition is potentially applicable to a wide range of tumors. Context-dependent similarities and differences of MAPK modulation will be dissected, in light of the complexity of the MAPK pathways. Therapeutic strategies combining the favorable effects of MAPK-oriented interventions on the tumor microenvironment while maintaining T-cell function will be presented. Finally, we will discuss recent studies highlighting the rationale for the implementation of MAPK-interference approaches in combination with checkpoint inhibitors and immune agonists in breast cancer
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
The present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
Variations on the Author
“Variations on the Author” discusses two of Eduardo Coutinho’s recent films (Um Dia na Vida, from 2010, and Últimas Conversas, posthumously released in 2015) and their contribution to the general question of documentary authorship. The director’s filmography is characterized by a consistent yet self-effacing form of authorial self-inscription: Coutinho often features as an interviewer that rather than express opinions propels discourses; an interviewer that is good at listening. This mode of self-inscription characterizes him as an author who is not expressive but who is nonetheless markedly present on the screen. In Um Dia na Vida, however, Coutinho is completely absent form the image, while Últimas Conversas, on the contrary, includes a confessional prologue that moves the director from the margins to the center of his films. This article examines the ways in which these works stand out in the filmography of a director who offers new insights into the notion of cinematic authorship
Appropriate Similarity Measures for Author Cocitation Analysis
We provide a number of new insights into the methodological discussion about author cocitation analysis. We first argue that the use of the Pearson correlation for measuring the similarity between authors’ cocitation profiles is not very satisfactory. We then discuss what kind of similarity measures may be used as an alternative to the Pearson correlation. We consider three similarity measures in particular. One is the well-known cosine. The other two similarity measures have not been used before in the bibliometric literature. Finally, we show by means of an example that our findings have a high practical relevance.information science;Pearson correlation;cosine;similarity measure;author cocitation analysis
Dispelling the Myths Behind First-author Citation Counts
We conducted a full-scale evaluative citation analysis study of scholars in the XML research field to explore just how different from each other author rankings resulting from different citation counting methods actually are, and to demonstrate the capability of emerging data and tools on the Web in supporting more realistic citation counting methods. Our results contest some common arguments for the continued
use of first-author citation counts in the evaluation of scholars, such as high correlations between author rankings by first-author citation counts and other citation
counting methods, and high costs of using more realistic citation counting methods that are not well-supported by the ISI databases. It is argued that increasingly available digital full text research papers make it possible for citation analysis studies to go beyond what the ISI databases have directly supported and to employ more
sophisticated methods
- …
