Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24561444›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Cancer2014

RET revisited: expanding the oncogenic portfolio.

Lois M Mulligan

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Cancer, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 269 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
269citing papers in PubMed
35.6field-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

269 citing papers in PubMed, 508 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Intracranial Efficacy of Selpercatinib inClinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research · 2021
    Trial
  4. Efficacy of Selpercatinib inThe New England journal of medicine · 2020
    Trial
  5. Article
  6. Development and Characterization of a Patient-DerivedJTO clinical and research reports · 2026
    Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Observational
  16. Pan-tumor validation of FoundationOneFrontiers in oncology · 2026
    Article
  17. Review
  18. Genes · 2025
    Review
  19. Article
  20. Review

209 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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Lois M MulliganDivision of Cancer Biology and Genetics, Cancer Research Institute and Department of Pathology and Molecular Medicine, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario K7L 3N6, Canada.
Queen's University · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The RET receptor tyrosine kinase is crucial for normal development but also contributes to pathologies that reflect both the loss and the gain of RET function. Activation of RET occurs via oncogenic mutations in familial and sporadic cancers - most notably, those of the thyroid and the lung. RET has also recently been implicated in the progression of breast and pancreatic tumours, among others, which makes it an attractive target for small-molecule kinase inhibitors as therapeutics. However, the complex roles of RET in homeostasis and survival of neural lineages and in tumour-associated inflammation might also suggest potential long-term pitfalls of broadly targeting RET.

Indexed as

AnimalsHumansNeoplasmsProto-Oncogene Proteins c-retProto-Oncogene Proteins c-ret

Identifiers

PMID24561444
OpenAlexW2096735709

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.