Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18372910›Full record

ReviewOncogene2008

Catch of the day: zebrafish as a human cancer model.

K Stoletov, R Klemke

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Oncogene, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 96 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
96citing 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

96 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Zebrafish live imaging: a strong weapon in anticancer drug discovery and development.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2024
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Zebrafish Models of Paediatric Brain Tumours.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review

36 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

2 authors.

K StoletovDepartment of Pathology, University of California at San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA.
R Klemke

Funding

Survival Mechanisms of Invasive Carcinoma CellsR01CA097022 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO · PI KLEMKE, RICHARD L. · 2003 to 2017
$4.6M
Mechanisms of Lamellipodia Growth &RetractionR01GM068487 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO · PI KLEMKE, RICHARD L. · 2003 to 2011
$2.3M
NCI NIH HHS CA097022NIGMS NIH HHS GM068487
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Zebrafish are making big waves in the field of cancer research. The effect has been widespread and continues to gain speed as more and more cancer researchers ride the wave of zebrafish biology. This has been largely due to the development of transgenic and xenograft models of cancer, which recapitulate many aspects of different human cancers including lymphoblastic T-cell leukemia, pancreatic cancer, melanoma and rhabdomyosarcoma. These models are already being utilized by academia and industry to search for genetic and chemical modifiers of cancer with success. The attention has been further stimulated by the amenability of zebrafish to pharmacological testing and the superior imaging properties of fish tissues that allow visualization of cancer progression and angiogenesis in live animals. This review summarizes the current zebrafish models of cancer and discusses their utility in human cancer research and future directions in the field.

Indexed as

Disease Models, AnimalAnimalsHumansNeoplasmsNeovascularization, PathologicXenograft Model Antitumor AssaysZebrafish

Identifiers

PMID18372910

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.