Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27147901›Full record

ReviewClinical Medicine Insights. Oncology2016

Markers of Response to Antiangiogenic Therapies in Colorectal Cancer: Where Are We Now and What Should Be Next?

E Una Cidon, P Alonso, B Masters

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Clinical Medicine Insights. Oncology, 2016. 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
3.1field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Targeting angiogenesis in gastrointestinal tumors: current challenges.Translational gastroenterology and hepatology · 2016
    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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

E Una CidonDepartment of Medical Oncology, Royal Bournemouth Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Bournemouth, UK.
P AlonsoDepartment of Clinical Oncology, Clinical University Hospital, Valladolid, Spain.
B MastersDepartment of Oncology, Nottingham City Hospital, Nottingham, UK.
Nottingham City Hospital · GBRoyal Bournemouth Hospital · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Despite advances in the treatment of colorectal cancer (CRC), it remains the second most common cause of cancer-related death in the Western world. Angiogenesis is a complex process that involves the formation of new blood vessels from preexisting vessels. It is essential for promoting cancer survival, growth, and dissemination. The inhibition of angiogenesis has been shown to prevent tumor progression experimentally, and several chemotherapeutic targets of tumor angiogenesis have been identified. These include anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) treatments, such as bevacizumab (a VEGF-specific binding antibody) and anti-VEGF receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors, although antiangiogenic therapy has been shown to be effective in the treatment of several cancers, including CRC. However, it is also associated with its own side effects and financial costs. Therefore, the identification of biomarkers that are able to identify patients who are more likely to benefit from antiangiogenic treatment is very important. This article intends to be a concise summary of the potential biomarkers that can predict or prognosticate the benefit of antiangiogenic treatments in CRC, and also what we can expect in the near future.

Indexed as

antiangiogenesiscolorectal cancerpredictive markersVEGF

Identifiers

PMID27147901
PMCPMC4849423
OpenAlexW2344708553

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.