ArticleBreast cancer (Dove Medical Press)2013
Breast cancer causes and treatment: where are we going wrong?
Article in Breast cancer (Dove Medical Press), 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Understanding breast cancer causes: insights from Jordanian women's awareness.Future science OA · 2026Article
- Paradoxical Behavior of Oncogenes Undermines the Somatic Mutation Theory.Biomolecules · 2022Article
- Molecular Mechanisms and Pathways as Targets for Cancer Prevention and Progression with Dietary Compounds.International journal of molecular sciences · 2017Review
- Causal Therapy of Breast Cancer Irrelevant of Age, Tumor Stage and ER-Status: Stimulation of Estrogen Signaling Coupled With Breast Conserving Surgery.Recent patents on anti-cancer drug discovery · 2016Review
- DNA stabilization by the upregulation of estrogen signaling in BRCA gene mutation carriers.Drug design, development and therapy · 2015Article
- The pitfall of the transient, inconsistent anticancer capacity of antiestrogens and the mechanism of apparent antiestrogen resistance.Drug design, development and therapy · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This discussion paper seeks to provoke thoughts about cancer research in general, and why breast cancer in particular is not yet "curable". It asks the question - are we looking at the disease in the right way? Should we regard cancer as a progressive state, which is part of aging? Should we tailor treatment to "reset" the system or slow progression rather than try using toxic and aggressive therapy to kill every cancer cell (and sometimes also the patient)? The thesis is presented that we need to revisit our fundamental beliefs about the disease and then ask why we cling to beliefs that clearly are no longer valid. The paper also questions the role of ethics boards in hampering research and discusses the concept that breast cancer is an industry with vested interests involving profiteering by preventive, diagnostic, and therapeutic players. Finally, the paper suggests some ways forward based on emerging concepts in system biology and epigenetics.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.