Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16550159›Full record

ReviewOncogene2006

Using high-throughput SNP technologies to study cancer.

L J Engle, C L Simpson, J E Landers

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Oncogene, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 41 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
41citing papers in PubMed
5.8field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

41 citing papers in PubMed, 126 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Polymorphisms in theJournal of Cancer · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Frontiers in genetics · 2021
    Article
  10. The 40bp indel polymorphism ofMolecular biology research communications · 2019
    Article
  11. BioMed research international · 2019
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Single Nucleotide Polymorphism Genotyping in Single-Molecule Electronic Circuits.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2017
    Article
  15. OncoTargets and therapy · 2017
    Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Predictive and prognostic molecular markers for cholangiocarcinoma in Han Chinese population.International journal of clinical and experimental medicine · 2015
    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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

L J EngleCetek Corporation, Marlborough, MA, USA.
C L Simpson
J E Landers
King's College London · GBMassachusetts General Hospital · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Identifying genes involved in the development of cancer is crucial to fully understanding cancer biology, for developing novel therapeutics for cancer treatment and for providing methods for cancer prevention and early diagnosis. The use of polymorphic markers, in particular single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), promises to provide a comprehensive tool for analysing the human genome and identifying those genes and genomic regions contributing to the cancer phenotype. This review summarizes the various analytical methodologies in which SNPs are used and presents examples of how each of these methodologies have been used to locate genes and genomic regions of interest for various cancer types. Additionally many of the current SNP-analysing technologies will be reviewed with particular attention paid to the advantages and disadvantages of each and how each technology can be applied to the analysis of the genome for identifying cancer-related genes.

Indexed as

Genetic MarkersPolymorphism, Single NucleotideGenetic LinkageGenetic Predisposition to DiseaseGenotypeHumansNeoplasmsGenetic Markers

Identifiers

PMID16550159
OpenAlexW2091963315

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.