ReviewNature reviews. Cancer2010
Integrating biobanks: addressing the practical and ethical issues to deliver a valuable tool for cancer research.
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 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Ethical aspects of human biobanks: a systematic review.Croatian medical journal · 2011Pooled it
- Impact of ultra-low temperature storage on serum sIgE detection and allergic disease biobank feasibility.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Examining disparities in large-scale patient-reported data capture using digital tools among cancer patients at clinical intake.Cancer medicine · 2023Article
- Quality matters: International standards for biobanking.Cell proliferation · 2022Review
- The Significance of Biobanking in the Sustainability of Biomedical Research: A Review.Iranian biomedical journal · 2020Review
- Article
- The Ethics of Big Data: Current and Foreseeable Issues in Biomedical Contexts.Science and engineering ethics · 2016Review
- Adjustment of Cell-Type Composition Minimizes Systematic Bias in Blood DNA Methylation Profiles Derived by DNA Collection Protocols.PloS one · 2016Article
- Cancer biomarker discovery and validation.Translational cancer research · 2015Article
- Improving diversity in cancer research trials: the story of the Cancer Disparities Research Network.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2014Article
- Epidemiology: Biorepositories for cancer research in developing countries.Nature reviews. Clinical oncology · 2013Article
- Biopsies: next-generation biospecimens for tailoring therapy.Nature reviews. Clinical oncology · 2013Review
- Evolution of biobanks and ethical governance for the emerging applications in biomedical research.Journal of oral and maxillofacial pathology : JOMFPReview
- Need for a national oral cancer biobank for cutting-edge translational research in developing countries.Journal of oral and maxillofacial pathology : JOMFPArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cancer is caused by complex interactions between genes, environment and lifestyles. Biobanks of well-annotated human tissues are an important resource for studying the underlying mechanisms of cancer. Although such biobanks exist, their integration to form larger biobanks is now required to provide the diversity of samples that are needed to study the complexity and heterogeneity of cancer. Clear guidelines and policies are also required to address the challenges of integrating individual institutional or national biobanks and build public trust. This Science and Society article highlights some of the main practical and ethical issues that are undergoing discussion in the integration of tissue biobanks for cancer.
Indexed as
Identifiers
20703251What 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.