Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28847311›Full record

ArticleChinese journal of cancer2017

The 150 most important questions in cancer research and clinical oncology series: questions 50-56.

Chinese Journal of Cancer

Abstract readEditorial
In one paragraph

Article in Chinese journal of cancer, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

1 author.

Chinese Journal of Cancer

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Since the beginning of 2017, Chinese Journal of Cancer has published a series of important questions in cancer research and clinical oncology, which sparkle diverse thoughts, interesting communications, and potential collaborations among researchers all over the world. In this article, seven more questions are presented as followed. Question 50. When tumor cells spread from primary site to distant sites, are they required to be "trained" or "armed" in the bone marrow niche prior to colonizing soft tissues? Question 51. Are there tipping points during cancer progression which can be identified for manipulation? Question 52. Can we replace molecular biomarkers by network biomarkers? Question 53. Are conventional inhibitors of key cellular processes such as cell proliferation and differentiation more effective than targeted chemotherapeutics that antagonize the downstream cell signaling network via cell-surface receptors such as epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) and c-Met, or intracellular receptors such as androgen receptor (AR) and estrogen receptor (ER), by drugs like erlotinib, sunitinib and cabozantinib, or enzalutamide and tomoxifen? Question 54. How can we robustly identify the candidate causal event of somatic genome alteration (SGA) by using computational approach? Question 55. How can we systematically reveal the immune evasion mechanism exploited by each tumor and utilize such information to guide targeted therapy to restore immune sensitivity? Question 56. Can the nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) patients with sarcomatoid carcinoma (SC) subtype benefit from more specific targeted therapy?

Indexed as

HumansMedical OncologyNeoplasmsResearchBone marrow nicheImmune evasion mechanismNetwork biomarkersSarcomatoid carcinomaSomatic genome alterationTargeted chemotherapeuticsTipping point during cancer progression

Identifiers

PMID28847311
PMCPMC5574233

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.