Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23016578›Full record

ReviewBMC medicine2012

Renal cancer biomarkers: the promise of personalized care.

Naveen S Vasudev, Peter J Selby, Rosamonde E Banks

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BMC medicine, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 43 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
43citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
6.3field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

43 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 68 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Biomedicines · 2023
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. circ-ZNF609: A potent circRNA in human cancers.Journal of cellular and molecular medicine · 2021
    Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Powerful quantifiers for cancer transcriptomics.World journal of clinical oncology · 2020
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  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

3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Naveen S VasudevThe Institute of Cancer Research, Fulham Road, London SW3 6JB, UK. N.Vasudev@leeds.ac.uk
Peter J Selby
Rosamonde E Banks
Cancer Research UK · GBInstitute of Cancer Research · GBSt James's University Hospital · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Significant advances in our understanding of the biology of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) have been achieved in recent years. These insights have led to the introduction of novel targeted therapies, revolutionising the management of patients with advanced disease. Nevertheless, there are still no biomarkers in routine clinical use in RCC. Tools used routinely to determine prognosis have not changed over the past decade; classification remains largely morphology based; and patients continue to be exposed to potentially toxic therapy with no indication of the likelihood of response. Thus the need for biomarkers in RCC is urgent. Here, we focus on recent advances in our understanding of the genetics and epigenetics of RCC, and the potential for such knowledge to provide novel markers and therapeutic targets. We highlight on-going research that is likely to deliver further candidate markers as well as generating large, well-annotated sample banks that will facilitate future studies. It is imperative that promising candidates are validated using these resources, and in subsequent prospective clinical trials, so that future biomarkers may be used in the clinic to personalize patient care.

Indexed as

BiomarkersEpigenomicsGenomicsHumansKidney NeoplasmsBiomarkers

Identifiers

PMID23016578
PMCPMC3521191
OpenAlexW1977411489

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.