Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28356771›Full record

ReviewCancer management and research2017

George Kim

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Cancer management and research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 31 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Necroptosis activation is associated with greater methylene blue-photodynamic therapy-induced cytotoxicity in human pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma cells.Photochemical & photobiological sciences : Official journal of the European Photochemistry Association and the European Society for Photobiology · 2023
    Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Combination Therapies and Drug Delivery Platforms in Combating Pancreatic Cancer.The Journal of pharmacology and experimental therapeutics · 2019
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. 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.

George Kim21st Century Oncology, University of Florida Health Oncology, Jacksonville, FL, USA.
University of Florida Health · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNanoparticle albumin-bound paclitaxel (

methodsThis systematic review includes results from studies that either published results in a peer-reviewed journal or presented the results at a major oncology conference.

resultsSixty-two studies were included (50 in the advanced/metastatic setting and 12 in the locally advanced setting). Most studies on the treatment of MPC were exclusively first line (33/50). Nevertheless, the studies in this review comprised a broad spectrum of patients, including those <65 and ≥65 years of age and those with a Karnofsky performance status of 70-100. Median overall survival (OS) in studies of DISCUSSION: Studies conducted after MPACT have demonstrated that

Indexed as

metastaticnab-paclitaxelneoadjuvantpancreatic cancersystematic review

Identifiers

PMID28356771
PMCPMC5360414
OpenAlexW2595668845

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.