Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18304381›Full record

ArticleBreast cancer research : BCR2008

Re-evaluation of mammary stem cell biology based on in vivo transplantation.

Gilbert H Smith, Daniel Medina

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Breast cancer research : BCR, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing 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

32 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Epithelial Plasticity During Human Breast Morphogenesis and Cancer Progression.Journal of mammary gland biology and neoplasia · 2016
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Stromal mediation of radiation carcinogenesis.Journal of mammary gland biology and neoplasia · 2010
    Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Gilbert H SmithMammary Stem Cell Biology Section, Mammary Biology And Tumorigenesis Laboratory, CCR, NCI, 37 Convent Drive, Bldg. 37, Rm. 1106, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892 USA. gs4d@nih.gov
Daniel Medina

Funding

Biology of Mammary Gland Development and TumorigenesisZIABC010021 · NCI · DIVISION OF BASIC SCIENCES - NCI · PI SMITH, GILBERT · 2009 to 2020
$11.6M
Mammary Gland Development and TumorigenesisZ01BC010021 · NCI · DIVISION OF BASIC SCIENCES - NCI · PI SMITH, GILBERT · 1996 to 2008
$1.8M
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Over nearly half a century, transplantation methods have been employed to regenerate the mammary gland in vivo. Recent highly cited reports claim to have demonstrated the regeneration of an entire functional mammary gland from a single mammary epithelial cell. Nevertheless, re-examination of the literature on the transplantation biology of mammary gland regeneration reveals that a complex, combinatorial interaction between variously differentiated mammary epithelial cells and the mammary fat pad stroma is indispensable to this process. In the present article, these issues are reviewed and discussed to provide a greater understanding of the complexity of these multiplex interactions.

Indexed as

AnimalsBiomarkers, TumorClone CellsFemaleHumansMammary Glands, HumanMiceRegenerationStem CellsStem Cell TransplantationBiomarkers, Tumor

Identifiers

PMID18304381
PMCPMC2374966

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.