Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25351923›Full record

ReviewToxicologic pathology2015

Comparative pathobiology of environmentally induced lung cancers in humans and rodents.

Arun Pandiri

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Toxicologic pathology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 19% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Frontiers in physiology · 2021
    Article
  4. AnApplied in vitro toxicology · 2018
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. 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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Arun PandiriExperimental Pathology Laboratories, Inc., Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, USA pandiriak@niehs.nih.gov apandiri@epl-inc.com.
Triangle · US

Funding

Intramural NIH HHS Z99 ES999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Lung cancer is the number one cause of cancer-related deaths in humans worldwide. Environmental factors play an important role in the epidemiology of these cancers. Rodents are the most common experimental model to study human lung cancers and are frequently used in bioassays to identify environmental exposure hazards associated with lung cancer. Lung tumors in rodents are common, particularly in certain strains of mice. Rodent lung tumors are predominantly bronchioloalveolar carcinomas and usually follow a progressive continuum of hyperplasia to adenoma to carcinoma. Human lung cancers are phenotypically more diverse and broadly constitute 2 types: small cell lung cancers and nonsmall cell lung cancers (NSCLCs). Rodent lung tumors resulting from exposure to environmental agents are comparable with certain adenocarcinomas that are a subset of human NSCLCs. Human pulmonary carcinomas differ from rodent lung tumors by exhibiting greater morphologic heterogeneity (encompassing squamous cell, neuroendocrine, mucinous, sarcomatoid, and multiple cell combinations), higher metastatic rate, higher stromal response, aggressive clinical behavior, and lack of a clear continuum of proliferative lesions. In spite of these differences, rodent lung tumors recapitulate several fundamental aspects of human lung tumor biology at the morphologic and molecular level, especially in lung cancers resulting from exposure to environmental carcinogens.

Indexed as

Disease Models, AnimalAnimalsCarcinogenicity TestsCarcinogens, EnvironmentalCarcinoma, Non-Small-Cell LungEnvironmental ExposureHumansLungLung NeoplasmsCarcinogens, Environmentalanimal modelscomparative pathology.environmental carcinogenslung cancer

Identifiers

PMID25351923
PMCPMC4310768
OpenAlexW2123109361

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.