Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17001466›Full record

ReviewPituitary2006

Genes involved in neuroendocrine tumor biology.

Eva Hofsli

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Pituitary, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 33% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. 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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Eva HofsliDepartment of Clinical and Molecular Medicine, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim N-7489, Norway. eva.hofsli@ntnu.no
Norwegian University of Science and Technology · NO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The fascinating, but often unpredictable, biology of neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) make the management of these malignancies a real challenge. The more recent development of high-throughput genomic and proteomic techniques, have opened a window to an increased knowledge of the biology of NETs. This review will discuss genes thought to play a role in the context of NE tumor biology, with particularly attention to those that may be potential new diagnostic and prognostic markers, as well as therapeutic targets. NETs constitute a heterogeneous group of neoplasm that may arise in virtually every topographic localization in the body, as a consequence of malignant transformation of various types of NE cells. Since NETs arising in the gastroenteropancreatic (GEP) or bronchopulmonary system are by far the most common, this review focuses on these entities, but lines are drawn to other NETs as well. Although large-scale gene expression analysis undoubtly have raised interesting new hypothesis concerning genes thought to play a role in tumor biology, discrepancies observed between studies and various platforms used, emphasizes the need to not only standardize the way microarray data are reported, but also to introduce standards in sample taking, processing and study design. In addition, the recognition of the complexity of the human proteome, with regard to generation of multiple isoforms from one gene, has created additional challenges. However,some goals have been reached already, as new knowledge has been translated into development of novel promising therapeutics.

Indexed as

Gene Expression Regulation, NeoplasticAnimalsBiomarkers, TumorGastrointestinal NeoplasmsGene Expression ProfilingHumansLung NeoplasmsNeuroendocrine CellsNeuroendocrine TumorsPancreatic NeoplasmsPrognosisSignal TransductionBiomarkers, Tumor

Identifiers

PMID17001466
OpenAlexW2005915914

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.