Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20630995›Full record

ReviewCold Spring Harbor perspectives in biology2010

Of mice and women: A short history of mouse mammary cancer research with an emphasis on the paradigms inspired by the transplantation method.

Daniel Medina

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cold Spring Harbor perspectives in biology, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing 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

17 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Rat Models of Hormone Receptor-Positive Breast Cancer.Journal of mammary gland biology and neoplasia · 2024
    Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. In-silico QTL mapping of postpubertal mammary ductal development in the mouse uncovers potential human breast cancer risk loci.Mammalian genome : official journal of the International Mammalian Genome Society · 2015
    Article
  11. Review
  12. Pttg1/securin is required for the branching morphogenesis of the mammary gland and suppresses mammary tumorigenesis.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2014
    Article
  13. Mouse models for efficacy testing of agents against radiation carcinogenesis—a literature review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2012
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
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

1 author.

Daniel MedinaDepartment of Molecular and Cellular Biology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas 77030, USA. dmedina@bcm.edu

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The ability to transplant mammary epithelial cells of any age or developmental stage to the normal anatomical site of an inbred recipient mouse strain has revolutionized the studies of mammary development and tumor biology over the past 50 years. This simple method has made the mammary gland of the rodent one of the most accessible and studied organs and facilitated our understanding of the fundamental cellular and molecular properties of normal and neoplastic development. This short review outlines the early concepts that led to the development of the transplantation technology and the impact of this method on our understanding for a variety of processes important both for the normal development and differentiation of the gland as well as the phenomena of neoplastic progression.

Indexed as

AnimalsAntigens, Viral, TumorDisease Models, AnimalEpithelial CellsFemaleHumansMammary Glands, AnimalMammary Neoplasms, ExperimentalMiceMice, Inbred StrainsNeoplasm TransplantationAntigens, Viral, Tumor

Identifiers

PMID20630995
PMCPMC2944362

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.