Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27259061›Full record

ReviewWiley interdisciplinary reviews. Systems biology and medicine2016

Mathematical models of breast and ovarian cancers.

Dana-Adriana Botesteanu, Stanley Lipkowitz, Jung-Min Lee, Doron Levy

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 32% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 33 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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 · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Dana-Adriana BotesteanuDepartment of Mathematics and Center for Scientific Computation and Mathematical Modeling (CSCAMM), University of Maryland, College Park, MD, USA.
Stanley LipkowitzWomen's Malignancies Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD, USA.
Jung-Min LeeWomen's Malignancies Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD, USA.
Doron LevyDepartment of Mathematics and Center for Scientific Computation and Mathematical Modeling (CSCAMM), University of Maryland, College Park, MD, USA.
Center for Cancer Research · USNational Cancer Institute · USUniversity of Maryland, College Park · US

Funding

Targeting DNA damage repair and related pathways in HRD-womens cancersZIABC011525 · NCI · DIVISION OF BASIC SCIENCES - NCI · PI LEE, JUNG-MIN · 2013 to 2025
$14.8M
Intramural NIH HHS Z99 CA999999
6 · The paper itself

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

Models, TheoreticalBreast NeoplasmsDrug Resistance, NeoplasmEarly Detection of CancerFemaleHumansMolecular Targeted TherapyOvarian NeoplasmsRecurrence

Identifiers

PMID27259061
PMCPMC4911289
OpenAlexW2418612295

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.