Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28344858›Full record

ReviewExperimental hematology & oncology2017

Adam Brufsky

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Experimental hematology & oncology, 2017. 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
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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, 32 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Paclitaxel drives TREM2Nature communications · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Expanding therapeutic utility of carfilzomib for breast cancer therapy by novel albumin-coated nanocrystal formulation.Journal of controlled release : official journal of the Controlled Release Society · 2019
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Emerging therapies for breast cancer.Journal of hematology & oncology · 2017
    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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Adam BrufskyDivision of Hematology/Oncology, University of Pittsburgh, 300 Halket Street, Suite 4628, Pittsburgh, PA 15213 USA.
University of Pittsburgh · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe purpose of this systematic review is to discuss recent studies and ongoing trials of

methodsPubMed and selected congress proceedings were searched for studies of

resultsSixty-three studies, including 23 in early-stage and 30 in metastatic breast cancer (some studies not classifiable by setting), were included in this analysis. Trials of neoadjuvant

conclusions

Indexed as

Breast cancerImmunotherapynab-PaclitaxelPathological complete response

Identifiers

PMID28344858
PMCPMC5361712
OpenAlexW2603750384

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.