ReviewWiley interdisciplinary reviews. Systems biology and medicine2016
Mathematical models of breast and ovarian cancers.
Review in Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Systems biology and medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 33 citations in OpenAlex.
- BRCA Testing in Asian Patients with Ovarian Cancer: Standard Clinical Practice or Mutation Prediction Model?Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2026Article
- Modeling the effects of combination immunotherapy on triple-negative breast cancer in syngeneic mice from PET imaging of CD4+ and CD8+ cells.Mathematical medicine and biology : a journal of the IMA · 2025Article
- Controlling treatment toxicity in ovarian cancer to prime the patient for tumor extinction therapy.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- To modulate or to skip: De-escalating PARP inhibitor maintenance therapy in ovarian cancer using adaptive therapy.Cell systems · 2024Article
- A coupled mathematical model between bone remodeling and tumors: a study of different scenarios using Komarova's model.Biomechanics and modeling in mechanobiology · 2023Article
- Prodigiosin/PU-H71 as a novel potential combined therapy for triple negative breast cancer (TNBC): preclinical insights.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- Crosstalk between HER2 and PD-1/PD-L1 in Breast Cancer: From Clinical Applications to Mathematical Models.Cancers · 2020Review
- Experimentally-driven mathematical modeling to improve combination targeted and cytotoxic therapy for HER2+ breast cancer.Scientific reports · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Women constitute the majority of the aging United States (US) population, and this has substantial implications on cancer population patterns and management practices. Breast cancer is the most common women's malignancy, while ovarian cancer is the most fatal gynecological malignancy in the US. In this review, we focus on these subsets of women's cancers, seen more commonly in postmenopausal and elderly women. In order to systematically investigate the complexity of cancer progression and response to treatment in breast and ovarian malignancies, we assert that integrated mathematical modeling frameworks viewed from a systems biology perspective are needed. Such integrated frameworks could offer innovative contributions to the clinical women's cancers community, as answers to clinical questions cannot always be reached with contemporary clinical and experimental tools. Here, we recapitulate clinically known data regarding the progression and treatment of the breast and ovarian cancers. We compare and contrast the two malignancies whenever possible in order to emphasize areas where substantial contributions could be made by clinically inspired and validated mathematical modeling. We show how current paradigms in the mathematical oncology community focusing on the two malignancies do not make comprehensive use of, nor substantially reflect existing clinical data, and we highlight the modeling areas in most critical need of clinical data integration. We emphasize that the primary goal of any mathematical study of women's cancers should be to address clinically relevant questions. WIREs Syst Biol Med 2016, 8:337-362. doi: 10.1002/wsbm.1343 For further resources related to this article, please visit the WIREs website.
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.