Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28430624›Full record

ReviewOncotarget2017

Photosensitizers in prostate cancer therapy.

Taher Gheewala, Troy Skwor, Gnanasekar Munirathinam

Open access · diamondAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Oncotarget, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed
4.3field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

34 citing papers in PubMed, 80 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Cellular Mechanisms of Singlet Oxygen in Photodynamic Therapy.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. 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.

Taher GheewalaDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, University of Illinois, College of Medicine, Rockford, IL, USA.
Troy SkworDepartment of Chemical and Biological Sciences, Rockford University, Rockford, IL, USA.
Gnanasekar MunirathinamDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, University of Illinois, College of Medicine, Rockford, IL, USA.
Illinois College · USRockford University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The search for new therapeutics for the treatment of prostate cancer is ongoing with a focus on the balance between the harms and benefits of treatment. New therapies are being constantly developed to offer treatments similar to radical therapies, with limited side effects. Photodynamic therapy (PDT) is a promising strategy in delivering focal treatment in primary as well as post radiotherapy prostate cancer. PDT involves activation of a photosensitizer (PS) by appropriate wavelength of light, generating transient levels of reactive oxygen species (ROS). Several photosensitizers have been developed with a focus on treating prostate cancer like mTHPC, motexafin lutetium, padoporfin and so on. This article will review newly developed photosensitizers under clinical trials for the treatment of prostate cancer, along with the potential advantages and disadvantages in delivering focal therapy.

Indexed as

PhotochemotherapyAnimalsHumansMalePhotosensitizing AgentsProstatic NeoplasmsReactive Oxygen SpeciesTreatment OutcomePhotosensitizing AgentsReactive Oxygen Speciesphotodynamic therapyphotosensitizersprostate cancer

Identifiers

PMID28430624
PMCPMC5444762
OpenAlexW2590269927

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.