Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24487689›Full record

ReviewBreast cancer research and treatment2014

Estrogen receptor (ER) α mutations in breast cancer: hidden in plain sight.

Suzanne A W Fuqua, Guowei Gu, Yassine Rechoum

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Breast cancer research and treatment, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 44 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
44citing papers in PubMed
4.8field-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

44 citing papers in PubMed, 79 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Cancers · 2023
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Editorial: Hormone resistance in cancer.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2023
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Targeting Notch in oncology: the path forward.Nature reviews. Drug discovery · 2021
    Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Ventral prostate and mammary gland phenotype in mice with complete deletion of the ERβ gene.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2020
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Endocrine therapy resistance: new insights.Breast (Edinburgh, Scotland) · 2019
    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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Suzanne A W FuquaLester and Sue Smith Breast Center, Dan L Duncan Cancer Center, Baylor College of Medicine, One Baylor Plaza, Houston, TX, 77030, USA, sfuqua@bcm.edu.
Guowei Gu
Yassine Rechoum
Baylor College of Medicine · US

Funding

Replication Stress and DNA Damage Response Drives ESR1 Mutant MetastasisR01CA072038 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS HLTH SCI CTR SAN ANT · PI Suzanne AW Fuqua · 1996 to 2026
$6.7M
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA072038NCI NIH HHS R01-CA72038
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The idea that somatic ERα mutations could play an important role in the evolution of hormone-dependent breast cancers was proposed some years ago (Fuqua J Mammary Gland Biol Neoplasia 6(4):407-417, 2001; Dasgupta et al. Annu Rev Med 65:279-292, 2013), but has remained controversial until recently. A significant amount of new data has confirmed these initial observations and shown their significance, along with much additional work relevant to the treatment of breast cancer. Thus, it is the purpose of this review to summarize the research to date on the existence and clinical consequences of ERα mutations in primary and metastatic breast cancer.

Indexed as

AnimalsBreast NeoplasmsCell Transformation, NeoplasticDisease ProgressionEstrogen Receptor alphaFemaleHumansMutationEstrogen Receptor alpha

Identifiers

PMID24487689
PMCPMC4123761
OpenAlexW1966403355

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.