Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20383179›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Cancer2010

Integrating high-throughput technologies in the quest for effective biomarkers for ovarian cancer.

Vathany Kulasingam, Maria P Pavlou, Eleftherios P Diamandis

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Cancer, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 69 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
69citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

69 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Frontiers in oncology · 2021
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Current Progresses of Exosomes as Cancer Diagnostic and Prognostic Biomarkers.International journal of biological sciences · 2019
    Review
  19. Article
  20. Article

9 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

3 authors.

Vathany KulasingamVathany Kulasingam, Maria P. Pavlou and Eleftherios P. Diamandis are at the Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology, University of Toronto, Toronto M5G 1X5, Ontario, Canada.
Maria P Pavlou
Eleftherios P Diamandis

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Despite widespread interest, few serum biomarkers have been introduced to the clinic over the past 20 years. Each approach to ovarian cancer biomarker discovery has its own advantages and disadvantages and it seems likely that a global biomarker discovery platform that mines all possible sources for biomarkers might be more useful. Such data could be combined with information from relevant microarray data, bioinformatic analyses and literature searches. This proposed integrated systems biology approach has the potential to yield promising ovarian cancer markers for diagnosis, prognosis and monitoring of patients during therapy.

Indexed as

Biomarkers, TumorEarly Detection of CancerFemaleHumansMass SpectrometryOvarian NeoplasmsBiomarkers, Tumor

Identifiers

PMID20383179

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.