Evidence map›Paper›PMID 15217486›Full record

ReviewBreast cancer research : BCR2004

S100A7 and the progression of breast cancer.

Ethan D Emberley, Leigh C Murphy, Peter H Watson

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Breast cancer research : BCR, 2004. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 45 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
45citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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

45 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 105 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. High neuronatin (NNAT) expression is associated with poor outcome in breast cancer.Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology · 2017
    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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Ethan D EmberleyManitoba Institute of Cell Biology, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada. umember0@cc.umanitoba.ca
Leigh C Murphy
Peter H Watson
University of Manitoba · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The S100 gene family comprises more than 20 members whose protein sequences encompass at least one EF-hand Ca2+ binding motif. The expression of individual family members is not ubiquitous for all tissues and there appears to be an element of tissue-specific expression. Molecular analysis of breast tumors has revealed that several S100s, including S100A2, S100A4 and S100A7, exhibit altered expression levels during breast tumorigenesis and/or progression. Subsequent studies have started to describe a functional role for these S100 proteins as well as their mechanism of action and the biochemical pathways they modify. The present review outlines what is known about S100A7 in breast cancer and summarizes the need to better understand the importance of this protein in breast cancer.

Indexed as

AnimalsBreast NeoplasmsCalcium-Binding ProteinsGene Expression Regulation, NeoplasticHumansS100 Calcium Binding Protein A7S100 ProteinsCalcium-Binding ProteinsS100A7 protein, humanS100 Calcium Binding Protein A7S100 Proteins

Identifiers

PMID15217486
PMCPMC468668
OpenAlexW1818157905

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.