Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 172

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 12 of the 12 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Cancer-Germline Antigen Expression Discriminates Clinical Outcome to CTLA-4 Blockade

Open access
Shukla, Sachet A., Bachireddy, Pavan, Schilling, Bastian, Galonska, Christina, Zhan, Qian, Bango, Clyde, Langer, Rupert, Lee, Patrick C., Gusenleitner, Daniel, Keskin, Derin B., Babadi, Mehrtash, Mohammad, Arman, Gnirke, Andreas, Clement, Kendell, Cartun, Zachary J., Van Allen, Eliezer M., Miao, Diana, Huang, Ying, Snyder, Alexandra, Merghoub, Taha, Wolchok, Jedd D., Garraway, Levi A., Meissner, Alexander, Weber, Jeffrey S., Hacohen, Nir, Neuberg, Donna, Potts, Patrick R., Murphy, George F., Lian, Christine G., Schadendorf, Dirk, Hodi, F. Stephen, Wu, Catherine J.·2018·Cell

Abstract

Summary CTLA-4 immune checkpoint blockade is clinically effective in a subset of patients with metastatic melanoma. We identify a subcluster of MAGE-A cancer-germline antigens, located within a narrow 75 kb region of chromosome Xq28, that predicts resistance uniquely to blockade of CTLA-4, but not PD-1. We validate this gene expression signature in an independent anti-CTLA-4-treated cohort and show its specificity to the CTLA-4 pathway with two independent anti-PD-1-treated cohorts. Autophagy, a process critical for optimal anti-cancer immunity, has been previously shown to be suppressed by the MAGE-TRIM28 ubiquitin ligase in vitro. We now show that the expression of the key autophagosome component LC3B and other activators of autophagy are negatively associated with MAGE-A protein levels in human melanomas, including samples from patients with resistance to CTLA-4 blockade. Our findings implicate autophagy suppression in resistance to CTLA-4 blockade in melanoma, suggesting exploitation of autophagy induction for potential therapeutic synergy with CTLA-4 inhibitors.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.cell.2018.03.026

Cites

12 of 12 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 12 references

Cited by

See all 172

Metadata

Authors
Shukla, S. A., Bachireddy, P., Schilling, B., Galonska, C., Zhan, Q., Bango, C., Langer, R., Lee, P. C., Gusenleitner, D., Keskin, D. B., Babadi, M., Mohammad, A., Gnirke, A., Clement, K., Cartun, Z. J., Van Allen, E. M., Miao, D., Huang, Y., Snyder, A., Merghoub, T., Wolchok, J. D., Garraway, L. A., Meissner, A., Weber, J. S., Hacohen, N., Neuberg, D., Potts, P. R., Murphy, G. F., Lian, C. G., Schadendorf, D., Hodi, F. S., & Wu, C. J.
Venue
Cell
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2018-04
Volume
173
Issue
3
Pages
624-633.e8
ISSN
0092-8674 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2796531277
Cited by
172
References
12
FWCI
6.40
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Cancer-Germline Antigen Expression Discriminates Clinical Outcome to CTLA-4 Blockade. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.cell.2018.03.026
The paper
Shukla, S. A., Bachireddy, P., Schilling, B., Galonska, C., Zhan, Q., Bango, C., Langer, R., Lee, P. C., Gusenleitner, D., Keskin, D. B., Babadi, M., Mohammad, A., Gnirke, A., Clement, K., Cartun, Z. J., Van Allen, E. M., Miao, D., Huang, Y., Snyder, A., . . . Wu, C. J. (2018). Cancer-Germline Antigen Expression Discriminates Clinical Outcome to CTLA-4 Blockade. Cell. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2018.03.026

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.