Evidence map›Paper›PMID 10498884›Full record

ReviewOncogene1999

Modeling human lung cancer in mice: similarities and shortcomings.

D A Tuveson, T Jacks

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Oncogene, 1999. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 66 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
66citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

66 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 133 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article

6 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

D A TuvesonDana-Farber Cancer Institute, 44 Binney Street, Boston, Massachusetts, MA 02115, USA.
T Jacks
Dana-Farber Cancer Institute · USHoward Hughes Medical Institute · US

Funding

Training Program in Cancer Biology and TherapeuticsT32CA071345 · NCI · MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL · PI Daniel A. Haber, Lecia V. Sequist · 1997 to 2026
$10.6M
NCI NIH HHS T32CA71345
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Lung cancer kills more Americans yearly than any other neoplastic process. Mortality rates have changed little over the past several decades, despite improvements in surgical techniques, radiation therapy and chemotherapy. The identification of mutations in oncogenes and tumor suppressor genes in human lung tumor specimens, including K-ras, p53, p16INK4a and Rb, offers molecular explanations for tumor development and resistance to therapy. Mouse models of human lung cancer may advance our understanding of this disease. The examination of mice which develop lung cancer either spontaneously or due to carcinogen exposure, and the creation of mouse strains harboring the specific genetic mutations found in human lung cancer are among strategies being pursued.

Indexed as

Disease Models, AnimalAnimalsHumansLung NeoplasmsMice

Identifiers

PMID10498884
OpenAlexW2333148719

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.