Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20139719›Full record

ReviewCancer biology & therapy2010

Mitogen activated protein kinase phosphatases and cancer.

Kelly K Haagenson, Gen Sheng Wu

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cancer biology & therapy, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

36 citing papers in PubMed, 75 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Evaluation of Genotoxicity and Toxicity ofMolecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Dual-specificity phosphatases: therapeutic targets in cancer therapy resistance.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2022
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Dual-specificity MAP kinase phosphatases in health and disease.Biochimica et biophysica acta. Molecular cell research · 2019
    Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Kelly K HaagensonGraduate Program in Cancer Biology, Wayne State University School of Medicine, Detroit, MI, USA.
Gen Sheng Wu
Schlumberger (Ireland) · IEWayne State University · US

Funding

The Role of Phosphatase CL100/MKP1 in Human CancerR01CA100073 · NCI · WAYNE STATE UNIVERSITY · PI WU, GEN SHENG · 2004 to 2009
$1.3M
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA100073
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Deregulation of cell signaling is a vital part of cancer development. The mitogen activated protein kinase (MAPK) family is involved in regulating both cell growth and cell death. This family of kinases is negatively regulated by mitogen activated protein kinase phosphatases (MKPs). MKPs are dual specificity phosphatases that target threonine and tyrosine residues that appear in a TXY motif. There are eleven members of the MKP family. Expression of MKPs has been shown to be altered in many different types of cancer. Most of what is known centers on MKP-1, MKP-2 and MKP-3. This review will focus on their role in cancer development and progression.

Indexed as

Cell DeathCell ProliferationDual Specificity Phosphatase 1Dual-Specificity PhosphatasesFemaleHumansMaleMitogen-Activated Protein Kinase PhosphatasesMitogen-Activated Protein KinasesNeoplasmsNervous System NeoplasmsSignal TransductionDual Specificity Phosphatase 1Dual-Specificity PhosphatasesDUSP1 protein, humanMitogen-Activated Protein Kinase PhosphatasesMitogen-Activated Protein Kinases

Identifiers

PMID20139719
PMCPMC4063278
OpenAlexW2053771592

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.