ReviewFrontiers in oncology2014
The war on cancer: a military perspective.
Review in Frontiers in oncology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- An EpigeneticInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2022Review
- De novo assembly of the transcriptome of scleractinian coral, Anomastraea irregularis and analyses of its response to thermal stress.Molecular biology reports · 2021Article
- Metronomics: Intrinsic Anakoinosis Modulator?Frontiers in pharmacology · 2018Article
- A look inside the mechanistic black box: Are red blood cells the critical effectors of RRx-001 cytotoxicity?Medical oncology (Northwood, London, England) · 2016Article
- Medical Machiavellianism: the tradeoff between benefit and harm with targeted chemotherapy.Oncotarget · 2016Article
- Confirmatory Trials in the Evaluation of Anticancer Medicinal Products in Man--PFS2: A Measure of Therapeutic Action-At-A-Distance.Neoplasia (New York, N.Y.) · 2015Review
- Retinoblastoma.Nature reviews. Disease primers · 2015Review
- Review
- Flushing Out Carcinoid Syndrome: Beneficial Effect of the Anticancer Epigenetic Agent RRx-001 in a Patient with a Treatment-Refractory Neuroendocrine Tumor.Case reports in oncologyArticle
- Identification of Distinct Research Gaps that Complement Previous Critiques of Militaristic Language in Relation to Cancer and Other Non-Military Topics.Cancer control : journal of the Moffitt Cancer CenterArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Actually it has not quite happened yet, but almost imperceptibly, by degrees, we are learning to live with cancer. The "War on Cancer," although generally successful in the pediatric population, has gradually been replaced with a kinder, gentler treatment paradigm that strives to contain and maintain with stalemate over checkmate, a strategy that may literally constitute the path to least resistance. The purpose of this review is (1) to critically examine the War on Cancer as a powerfully evocative metaphor that is directly responsible for a counterproductive and even potentially dangerous war-like cell-kill treatment paradigm, (2) to suggest that a reframing of this metaphor in less retaliatory and aggressive terms along with a shift in clinical practice from a maximalist to a minimalist strategy is more appropriate to the treatment of cancer, and (3) to draw on examples from the military sector as points of reference and comparison that closely parallel the three therapeutic "control and containment" strategies discussed in this review: (1) "Optimox-like" trial designs, (2) epigenetic modulation, and (3) metronomic dosing.
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.