Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17466902›Full record

ReviewThe Lancet. Oncology2007

Active versus passive mechanisms in metastasis: do cancer cells crawl into vessels, or are they pushed?

Maximilian Bockhorn, Rakesh K Jain, Lance L Munn

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in The Lancet. Oncology, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 130 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
130citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.2field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

130 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 244 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. E-Cadherin Immunostaining in Equine Melanocytic Tumors.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2023
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Succinyl-CoA ligase ADP-forming subunit beta promotes stress granule assembly to regulate redox and drive cancer metastasis.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2023
    Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Review

70 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Maximilian BockhornDepartment of General, Visceral and Transplantation Surgery, University Hospital Essen, Germany.
Rakesh K Jain
Lance L Munn
Essen University Hospital · DEHarvard University · USMassachusetts General Hospital · US

Funding

CELL-SURFACE ADHESION--INFLUENCE OF BLOOD RHEOLOGYR01HL064240 · NHLBI · MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL · PI MUNN, LANCE L · 2000 to 2007
$2.2M
NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL064240
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Although millions of cells are shed from a tumour every day, haematogenous metastasis is believed to be very inefficient. This inefficiency is widely assumed to be a result of the destruction of cells in the bloodstream by shear stress and the immune system and a slow rate of extravasation and proliferation in the stroma at a secondary site. Here, we propose that, whereas active intravasation of cells into the circulation is important in some tumours, others might shed cells passively into the blood or lymphatic vessels without the involvement of active cell migration. We discuss the evidence for and against this passive-shedding hypothesis and the implications for future treatments.

Indexed as

Cell AdhesionBlood VesselsHumansNeoplasm InvasivenessNeoplasm MetastasisNeoplasmsNeovascularization, Pathologic

Identifiers

PMID17466902
PMCPMC2712886
OpenAlexW2142416414

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.