Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21074729›Full record

ReviewProgress in molecular biology and translational science2010

Molecular biology of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma progression: aberrant activation of developmental pathways.

Andrew D Rhim, Ben Z Stanger

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Progress in molecular biology and translational science, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed
6.6field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 35 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Mitochondrial CaCell reports · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Pancreatic cancer and its stroma: a conspiracy theory.World journal of gastroenterology · 2014
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Decreased RGS6 expression is associated with poor prognosis in pancreatic cancer patients.International journal of clinical and experimental pathology · 2014
    Article
  20. 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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Andrew D RhimGastroenterology Division, Department of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
Ben Z Stanger
Cancer Research Institute · US

Funding

Dissecting stromal-epithelial interactions in the adult exocrine pancreasK08DK088945 · NIDDK · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI RHIM, ANDREW D · 2010 to 2015
$765k
NCI NIH HHS L30 CA136450NIDDK NIH HHS K08 DK088945
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Embryonic development marks a period of peak tissue growth and morphogenesis in the mammalian lifecycle. Many of the pathways that underlie cell proliferation and movement are relatively quiescent in adult animals but become reactivated during carcinogenesis. This phenomenon has been particularly well documented in pancreatic cancer, where detailed genetic studies and a robust mouse model have permitted investigators to test the role of various developmental signals in cancer progression. In this chapter, we review current knowledge regarding the signaling pathways that act during pancreatic development and the evidence that the reactivation of developmentally important signals is critical for the pathogenesis of this treatment-refractory malignancy.

Indexed as

Disease ProgressionAdenocarcinomaAnimalsCarcinoma, Pancreatic DuctalHumansMolecular BiologyPancreatic NeoplasmsSignal Transduction

Identifiers

PMID21074729
PMCPMC3117430
OpenAlexW1500816076

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.