Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21938273›Full record

ArticleAmerican journal of cancer research2011

Squamous Cell Carcinoma - Similarities and Differences among Anatomical Sites.

Wusheng Yan, Ignacio I Wistuba, Michael R Emmert-Buck, Heidi S Erickson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in American journal of cancer research, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 100 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
100citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–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

100 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. [Comparative pathology in oncology-Best practice].Pathologie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2024
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

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

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.

Wusheng YanPathogenetics Unit, Laboratory of Pathology, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892.
Ignacio I Wistuba
Michael R Emmert-Buck
Heidi S Erickson

Funding

Molecular Pathology of CancerZIASC010437 · NCI · DIVISION OF CLINICAL SCIENCES - NCI · PI EMMERT-BUCK, MICHAEL · 2009 to 2014
$2.9M
Molecular Pathology of CancerZ01SC010437 · SC · DIVISION OF CLINICAL SCIENCES - NCI · PI EMMERT-BUCK, MICHAEL R · 2002 to 2008
$1.4M
Intramural NIH HHS Z01 SC010437
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) is an epithelial malignancy involving many anatomical sites and is the most common cancer capable of metastatic spread. Development of early diagnosis methods and novel therapeutics are important for prevention and mortality reduction. In this effort, numerous molecular alterations have been described in SCCs. SCCs share many phenotypic and molecular characteristics, but they have not been extensively compared. This article reviews SCC as a disease, including: epidemiology, pathology, risk factors, molecular characteristics, prognostic markers, targeted therapy, and a new approach to studying SCCs. Through this comparison, several themes are apparent. For example, HPV infection is a common risk factor among the four major SCCs (NMSC, HNSC, ESCC, and NSCLC) and molecular abnormalities in cell-cycle regulation and signal transduction predominate. These data reveal that the molecular insights, new markers, and drug targets discovered in individual SCCs may shed light on this type of cancer as a whole.

Identifiers

PMID21938273
PMCPMC3175764

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.