Recent advances in cancer immunotherapy using monoclonal antibodies have dramatically revolutionized the therapeutic strategy against advanced malignancies, inspiring the exploration of various types of therapeutic antibodies. Bispecific antibodies (BsAbs) are recombinant molecules containing two different antigens or epitopes identifying binding domains. Bispecific antibody-based tumor immunotherapy has gained broad potential in preclinical and clinical investigations in a variety of tumor types following regulatory approval of newly developed technologies involving bispecific and multispecific antibodies. Meanwhile, a series of challenges such as antibody immunogenicity, tumor heterogeneity, low response rate, treatment resistance, and systemic adverse effects hinder the application of BsAbs. In this review, we provide insights into the various architecture of BsAbs, focus on BsAbs’ alternative different mechanisms of action and clinical progression, and discuss relevant approaches to overcome existing challenges in BsAbs clinical application.

Background and Purpose— A large number of traditional Chinese patent medicine (TCPM) are widely used for ischemic stroke in China. The aim of this study was to systematically review the existing clinical evidence on TCPM for ischemic stroke. Methods— We identified all TCPM that were listed in the Chinese National Essential Drug list of 2004 and those commonly used TCPM in current clinical practice for ischemic stroke. Fifty-nine TCPM were identified for further evaluation. We applied Cochrane systematic review methods. We searched for reports of randomized controlled trials and controlled clinical trials on any of the 59 TCPM for ischemic stroke comparing one TCPM with control. Primary outcomes included death or dependency at the end of follow-up (at least 3 months) and adverse events. Effects on neurological impairments were a secondary outcome. Results— One-hundred ninety-one trials (19 338 patients) on 22 TCPM were available and included, of which 120 were definite or possible randomized controlled trials and 71 were controlled clinical trials. The methodological quality of included trials was generally “poor.” Few trials reported methods of randomization. Three trials were randomized, double blind, and placebo-controlled. Primary outcomes: one trial on Puerarin and one trial on Shenmai injection assessed death or dependency at the end of long-term follow-up (at least 3 months) and found no statistically significant difference between 2 groups. The reported adverse events including allergic reaction, headache, nausea, diarrhea, bellyache, blood pressure change, and subcutaneous ecchymosis. Most of the adverse events were not severe. Secondary outcomes: analysis of the secondary outcome, “marked improvement in neurological deficit,” showed apparent benefits of about the same magnitude for all the TCPM studied. Of the 22 TCPM, 8 drugs (Milk vetch, Mailuoning, Ginkgo biloba, Ligustrazine, Danshen agents, Xuesetong, Puerarin, and Acanthopanax) had relatively more studies and patient numbers. Conclusions— There was insufficient good quality evidence on the effects of TCPM in ischemic stroke on the primary outcome (death or dependency). We considered the apparent benefit on neurological impairment was as likely to be attributable to bias from poor methodology as to a real treatment effect. However, because the agents assessed appeared potentially beneficial and nontoxic, further randomized controlled trials are justified. Eight drugs could be further research priorities.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have dramatically transformed the treatment landscape for various malignancies, achieving notable clinical outcomes across a wide range of indications. Despite these advances, resistance to immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) remains a critical clinical challenge, characterized by variable response rates and non-durable benefits. However, growing research into the complex intrinsic and extrinsic characteristics of tumors has advanced our understanding of the mechanisms behind ICI resistance, potentially improving treatment outcomes. Additionally, robust predictive biomarkers are crucial for optimizing patient selection and maximizing the efficacy of ICBs. Recent studies have emphasized that multiple rational combination strategies can overcome immune checkpoint resistance and enhance susceptibility to ICIs. These findings not only deepen our understanding of tumor biology but also reveal the unique mechanisms of action of sensitizing agents, extending clinical benefits in cancer immunotherapy. In this review, we will explore the underlying biology of ICIs, discuss the significance of the tumor immune microenvironment (TIME) and clinical predictive biomarkers, analyze the current mechanisms of resistance, and outline alternative combination strategies to enhance the effectiveness of ICIs, including personalized strategies for sensitizing tumors to ICIs.

It had been assumed that suppressing the undamaged contralesional motor cortex by repetitive low-frequency transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) or increasing the excitability of the damaged hemisphere cortex by high-frequency rTMS will promote function recovery after stroke. To assess the efficacy and safety of rTMS for improving function in people with stroke. We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (April 2012), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2012, Issue 4), the Chinese Stroke Trials Register (April 2012), MEDLINE (1950 to May 2012), EMBASE (1980 to May 2012), Science Citation Index (1981 to April 2012), Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Science (1990 to April 2012), CINAHL (1982 to May 2012), AMED (1985 to May 2012), PEDro (April 2012), REHABDATA (April 2012) and CIRRIE Database of International Rehabilitation Research (April 2012). In addition, we searched five Chinese databases, ongoing trials registers and relevant reference lists. We included randomised controlled trials comparing rTMS therapy with sham therapy or no therapy. We excluded trials that reported only laboratory parameters. Two review authors independently selected trials, assessed trial quality and extracted the data. We resolved disagreements by discussion. We included 19 trials involving a total of 588 participants in this review. Two heterogenous trials with a total of 183 participants showed that rTMS treatment was not associated with a significant increase in the Barthel Index score (mean difference (MD) 15.92, 95% CI -2.11 to 33.95). Four trials with a total of 73 participants were not found to have a statistically significant effect on motor function (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.51, 95% CI -0.99 to 2.01). Subgroup analyses of different stimulation frequencies or duration of illness also showed no significant difference. Few mild adverse events were observed in the rTMS groups, with the most common events being transient or mild headaches (2.4%, 8/327) and local discomfort at the site of the stimulation. Current evidence does not support the routine use of rTMS for the treatment of stroke. Further trials with larger sample sizes are needed to determine a suitable rTMS protocol and the long-term functional outcome.