Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17072946›Full record

ReviewWorld journal of gastroenterology2006

Hepatic progenitor cells in human liver tumor development.

Louis Libbrecht

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in World journal of gastroenterology, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing 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

22 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Liver progenitor cell-driven liver regeneration.Experimental & molecular medicine · 2020
    Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Human Liver Regeneration: An Etiology Dependent Process.International journal of molecular sciences · 2019
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Molecular events in hepatic preneoplasia: a review.Experimental and molecular pathology · 2010
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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.

Louis LibbrechtLaboratory of Morphology and Molecular Pathology, Minderbroedersstraat 12, Leuven 3000, Belgium. louis.libbrecht@uz.kuleuven.ac.be

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In recent years, the results of several studies suggest that human liver tumors can be derived from hepatic progenitor cells rather than from mature cell types. The available data indeed strongly suggest that most combined hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinomas arise from hepatic progenitor cells that retained their potential to differentiate into the hepatocytic and biliary lineages. Hepatic progenitor cells could also be the basis for some hepatocellular carcinomas and hepatocellular adenomas, although it is very difficult to determine the origin of an individual hepatocellular carcinoma. There is currently not enough data to make statements regarding a hepatic progenitor cell origin of cholangiocarcinoma. The presence of hepatic progenitor cell markers and the presence and extent of the cholangiocellular component are factors that are related to the prognosis of hepatocellular carcinomas and combined hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinomas, respectively.

Indexed as

Adenoma, Liver CellBiomarkers, TumorCarcinoma, HepatocellularCell Transformation, NeoplasticCholangiocarcinomaHepatocytesHumansLiver NeoplasmsStem CellsBiomarkers, Tumor

Identifiers

PMID17072946
PMCPMC4088131

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.