ReviewMinerva gastroenterologica e dietologica2009
Diagnosis and management of pancreatic cancer.
Review in Minerva gastroenterologica e dietologica, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- A new vulnerability to BET inhibition due to enhanced autophagy in BRCA2 deficient pancreatic cancer.Cell death & disease · 2023Article
- KRAS, A Prime Mediator in Pancreatic Lipid Synthesis through Extra Mitochondrial Glutamine and Citrate Metabolism.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021Review
- Effect of MUC1/β-catenin interaction on the tumorigenic capacity of pancreatic CD133Oncology letters · 2016Article
- Update on the management of pancreatic cancer: surgery is not enough.World journal of gastroenterology · 2015Review
- Intervention of mirtazapine on gemcitabine-induced mild cachexia in nude mice with pancreatic carcinoma xenografts.World journal of gastroenterology · 2012Article
- Induction of antigen-specific CTL and antibody responses in mice by a novel recombinant tandem repeat DNA vaccine targeting at mucin 1 of pancreatic cancer.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2010Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Pancreatic adenocarcinoma is an aggressive malignancy with the majority of patients dying within one year of diagnosis. While surgical resection with negative margins offers the only hope for cure only a small minority of patients are amenable to resection at the time of diagnosis owing to the propensity for early metastasis. While most advances in the last several decades have revolved around improvements in surgical techniques and postoperative outcomes, some modest inroads have been made with modern chemotherapy. This review discusses the diagnosis and management of pancreatic cancer and highlights some of the current issues. A Medline database search was performed to identify relevant articles using the keywords "pancreatic adenocarcinoma", "diagnosis", "CA19-9", "pancreaticoduodenectomy", "adjuvant therapy", "chemotherapy", and "microRNA". Additional papers were then identified by a manual search of the references from the key articles. While high quality CT is often the only imaging modality needed for preoperative evaluation, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), cholangiography, and endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) have been utilized for diagnosis, staging, and/ or palliation. The controversies of pylorus preservation, extended lymphadenectomy, and laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy are discussed. Randomized controlled trials regarding the use of 5-fluorouracil and gemcitabine are also reviewed. Early detection and aggressive surgical resection in combination with protocol-driven adjuvant therapy and novel molecular approaches are the only hope for cure. This review summarizes the recent literature on the abovementioned topics.
Indexed as
Identifiers
19942828PMC4058826What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.