Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25606974›Full record

ReviewViruses2015

Bacteriophage-derived vectors for targeted cancer gene therapy.

Md Zahidul Islam Pranjol, Amin Hajitou

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Viruses, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

18 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Bacteriophage-Mediated Cancer Gene Therapy.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022
    Review
  7. Bacteriophages as Solid Tumor Theragnostic Agents.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021
    Review
  8. The Many Applications of Engineered Bacteriophages-An Overview.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. CRISPR/Cas9: A Potential Life-Saving Tool. What's next?Molecular therapy. Nucleic acids · 2017
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Targeted molecular-genetic imaging and ligand-directed therapy in aggressive variant prostate cancer.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2016
    Article
  16. Towards a transcriptome-based theranostic platform for unfavorable breast cancer phenotypes.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2016
    Article
  17. Article
  18. 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

2 authors.

Md Zahidul Islam PranjolInstitute of Clinical and Biomedical Science, University of Exeter Medical School, Exeter, Devon EX1 2LU, UK. z.pranjol@exeter.ac.uk.
Amin HajitouPhage Therapy Group, Department of Medicine, Burlington Danes Building, Imperial College London, Hammersmith Hospital, Du Cane Road, London W12 0NN, UK. a.hajitou@imperial.ac.uk.

Funding

Medical Research Council G0701159
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cancer gene therapy expanded and reached its pinnacle in research in the last decade. Both viral and non-viral vectors have entered clinical trials, and significant successes have been achieved. However, a systemic administration of a vector, illustrating safe, efficient, and targeted gene delivery to solid tumors has proven to be a major challenge. In this review, we summarize the current progress and challenges in the targeted gene therapy of cancer. Moreover, we highlight the recent developments of bacteriophage-derived vectors and their contributions in targeting cancer with therapeutic genes following systemic administration.

Indexed as

Genes, NeoplasmBacteriophagesBiological TherapyBiomedical ResearchGene TargetingGenetic TherapyHumans

Identifiers

PMID25606974
PMCPMC4306838

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.