ArticleeLife2015
Dynamics of preventive vs post-diagnostic cancer control using low-impact measures.
Article in eLife, 2015. 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.
- The consistent anti-cancer effect of a simple exercise (Ou MC decrescendo phenomenon exercise) may hold promise for low-cost cancer prevention.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2024Article
- A Review of Mathematical Models for Tumor Dynamics and Treatment Resistance Evolution of Solid Tumors.CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology · 2019Review
- Modelling bistable tumour population dynamics to design effective treatment strategies.Journal of theoretical biology · 2019Article
- An ecosystem framework for understanding and treating disease.Evolution, medicine, and public health · 2018Review
- Quantification of in vivo progenitor mutation accrual with ultra-low error rate and minimal input DNA using SIP-HAVA-seq.Genome research · 2016Article
- The benefits of treating undetectable tumors.eLife · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cancer poses danger because of its unregulated growth, development of resistance, and metastatic spread to vital organs. We currently lack quantitative theory for how preventive measures and post-diagnostic interventions are predicted to affect risks of a life threatening cancer. Here we evaluate how continuous measures, such as life style changes and traditional treatments, affect both neoplastic growth and the frequency of resistant clones. We then compare and contrast preventive and post-diagnostic interventions assuming that only a single lesion progresses to invasive carcinoma during the life of an individual, and resection either leaves residual cells or metastases are undetected. Whereas prevention generally results in more positive therapeutic outcomes than post-diagnostic interventions, this advantage is substantially lowered should prevention initially fail to arrest tumour growth. We discuss these results and other important mitigating factors that should be taken into consideration in a comparative understanding of preventive and post-diagnostic interventions.
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.