Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21779010›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Cancer2011

The different roles of ER subtypes in cancer biology and therapy.

Christoforos Thomas, Jan-Åke Gustafsson

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Cancer, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 337 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
337citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
34.2field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

337 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 659 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Role of DCAF8 in Mammary Ductal Elongation and Branching Morphogenesis.Journal of mammary gland biology and neoplasia · 2026
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article

277 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.

Christoforos ThomasCenter for Nuclear Receptors and Cell Signalling, Department of Biology and Biochemistry, University of Houston, Houston 77204, Texas, USA.
Jan-Åke Gustafsson
University of Houston · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

By eliciting distinct transcriptional responses, the oestrogen receptors (ERs) ERα and ERβ exert opposite effects on cellular processes that include proliferation, apoptosis and migration and that differentially influence the development and the progression of cancer. Perturbation of ER subtype-specific expression has been detected in various types of cancer, and the differences in the expression of ERs are correlated with the clinical outcome. The changes in the bioavailability of ERs in tumours, together with their specific biological functions, promote the selective restoration of their activity as one of the major therapeutic approaches for hormone-dependent cancers.

Indexed as

AnimalsEstrogen Receptor alphaEstrogen Receptor betaHumansNeoplasmsPrognosisProtein IsoformsEstrogen Receptor alphaEstrogen Receptor betaProtein Isoforms

Identifiers

PMID21779010
OpenAlexW2034001757

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.