Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21067536›Full record

ReviewBreast cancer research : BCR2010

Antiangiogenic therapy for breast cancer.

Dorte Lisbet Nielsen, Michael Andersson, Jon Lykkegaard Andersen, Claus Kamby

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Breast cancer research : BCR, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2017
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Dorte Lisbet NielsenDepartment of Oncology, Herlev Hospital, University of Copenhagen, Denmark. dornie01@heh.regionh.dk
Michael Andersson
Jon Lykkegaard Andersen
Claus Kamby
Herlev Hospital · DKUniversity of Copenhagen · DK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Angiogenesis is an important component of cancer growth, invasion and metastasis. Therefore, inhibition of angiogenesis is an attractive strategy for treatment of cancer. We describe existing clinical trials of antiangiogenic agents and the challenges facing the clinical development and optimal use of these agents for the treatment of breast cancer. Currently, the most promising approach has been the use of bevacizumab, a humanized monoclonal antibody directed against the most potent pro-angiogenic factor, vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF). Small molecular inhibitors of VEGF tyrosine kinase activity, such as sorafenib, appear promising. While, the role of sunitinib and inhibitors of mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) in breast cancer has to be defined. Several unanswered questions remain, such as choice of drug(s), optimal duration of therapy and patient selection criteria.

Indexed as

Angiogenesis InhibitorsAntibodies, Monoclonal, HumanizedBenzenesulfonatesBevacizumabBreast NeoplasmsFemaleHumansIndolesNeovascularization, PathologicNiacinamidePhenylurea CompoundsProtein Kinase InhibitorsPyridinesPyrrolesSorafenibSunitinibAngiogenesis InhibitorsAntibodies, Monoclonal, HumanizedBenzenesulfonatesBevacizumabIndolesMTOR protein, humanNiacinamidePhenylurea CompoundsProtein Kinase InhibitorsPyridinesPyrrolesSorafenibSunitinibTOR Serine-Threonine KinasesVascular Endothelial Growth Factor A

Identifiers

PMID21067536
PMCPMC3096961
OpenAlexW2137314082

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.