Evidence map›Paper›PMID 12154404›Full record

ReviewOncogene2002

The study of aberrant methylation in cancer via restriction landmark genomic scanning.

Dominic J Smiraglia, Christoph Plass

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Oncogene, 2002. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

25 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. ACBD3 Bioinformatic Analysis and Protein Expression in Breast Cancer Cells.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. DNA methylation in promoter region as biomarkers in prostate cancer.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2012
    Article
  6. Genome-wide epigenetic modifications in cancer.Progress in drug research. Fortschritte der Arzneimittelforschung. Progres des recherches pharmaceutiques · 2011
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Promoter hypermethylation in prostate cancer.Cancer control : journal of the Moffitt Cancer Center · 2010
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. DNA methylation of cancer genome.Birth defects research. Part C, Embryo today : reviews · 2009
    Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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.

Dominic J SmiragliaDivision of Human Cancer Genetics, Department of Molecular Virology, Immunology and Medical Genetics, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, OH 43210, USA. Smiraglia.l@Apostbox.acs.ohio-state.edu
Christoph Plass

Funding

GENOMIC SCANNING IN ORAL CANCERR01DE013123 · NIDCR · OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY · PI PLASS, CHRISTOPH · 2000 to 2011
$2.3M
NIDCR NIH HHS DE13123-02
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Restriction landmark genomic scanning (RLGS) has been used to study DNA methylation in cancer for nearly a decade. The strong bias of RLGS for assessing the methylation state of CpG islands genome wide makes this an attractive technique to study both hypo- and hypermethylation of regions of the genome likely to harbor genes. RLGS has been used successfully to identify regions of hypomethylation, candidate tumor suppressor genes, correlations between hypermethylation events and clinical factors, and quantification of hypermethylation in a multitude of malignancies. This review will examine the major uses of RLGS in the study of aberrant methylation in cancer and discuss the significance of some of the findings.

Indexed as

DNA MethylationAnimalsCpG IslandsDNA, NeoplasmElectrophoresis, Gel, Two-DimensionalGene AmplificationGene DeletionGene Expression Regulation, NeoplasticHumansNeoplasmsDNA, Neoplasm

Identifiers

PMID12154404

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.