Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19298630›Full record

ReviewBrain pathology (Zurich, Switzerland)2010

Array-based genomics in glioma research.

Ahmed Idbaih, Emmanuelle Crinière, Keith L Ligon, Olivier Delattre, Jean-Yves Delattre

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Brain pathology (Zurich, Switzerland), 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

5 authors.

Ahmed IdbaihINSERM, Unité 711, Paris, France. ahmed.idbaih@gmail.com
Emmanuelle Crinière
Keith L Ligon
Olivier Delattre
Jean-Yves Delattre

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Over the years, several relevant biomarkers with a potential clinical interest have been identified in gliomas using various techniques, such as karyotype, microsatellite analysis, fluorescent in situ hybridization and chromosome comparative genomic hybridization. Despite their pivotal contribution to our understanding of gliomas biology, clinical application of these approaches has been limited by technological and clinical complexities. In contrast, genomic arrays (array-based comparative genomic hybridization and single nucleotide polymorphisms array) have emerged as promising technologies for clinical use in the setting of gliomas. Indeed, their feasibility and reliability have been rigorously assessed in gliomas and are discussed in this review. The well-known genomic biomarkers in gliomas are in fact readily and reliably identified using genomic arrays. Moreover, it detects a multitude of new cryptic genomic markers, with potential biological and/or clinical significances. The main studies dedicated to genomic characterization of gliomas using genomic arrays are reviewed here. Interestingly, several recurrent genomic signatures have been reported by different teams, suggesting the validity of these genomic patterns. In light of this, genomic arrays are relatively simple and cost-effective techniques whose implementation in molecular diagnostic laboratories should be encouraged as a valuable clinical tool for management of glioma patients.

Indexed as

GenomicsAnimalsAstrocytesAstrocytomaBrain NeoplasmsGlioblastomaGliomaHumansOligodendrogliomaOligonucleotide Array Sequence Analysis

Identifiers

PMID19298630
PMCPMC8094671

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.