Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28893933›Full record

ReviewPhilosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences2017

Tumour virus epidemiology.

Ruth M Lunn, Gloria D Jahnke, Charles S Rabkin

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 43 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Applying Antibodies Inside Cells: Principles and Recent Advances in Neurobiology, Virology and Oncology.BioDrugs : clinical immunotherapeutics, biopharmaceuticals and gene therapy · 2020
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Modelling the evolution of viral oncogenesis.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2019
    Article
  19. Review
  20. 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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Ruth M LunnOffice of the Report on Carcinogens, Division of the National Toxicology Program, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, National Institutes of Health, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9605-7137
Gloria D JahnkeOffice of the Report on Carcinogens, Division of the National Toxicology Program, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, National Institutes of Health, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, USA.
Charles S RabkinDivision of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD 20892-9760, USA rabkinc@exchange.nih.gov.
National Institutes of Health · USNational Cancer Institute · US

Funding

Molecular mechanisms of infection-related cancerZIACP010212 · NCI · DIVISION OF CANCER EPIDEMIOLOGY AND GENETICS · PI ENGELS, ERIC A · 2010 to 2025
$4.6M
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A viral etiology of cancer was first demonstrated in 1911 by Peyton Rous who injected cell-free filtrate from a chicken sarcoma into healthy chickens and found it induced a tumour. Since the discovery over 50 years ago of the Epstein-Barr virus as the cause of Burkitt lymphoma, seven other human viruses or groups of viruses-hepatitis B virus, hepatitis C virus, human immunodeficiency virus type 1, some human papillomaviruses, human T-cell lymphotropic virus type 1, Kaposi sarcoma-associated herpesvirus and Merkel cell polyomavirus-have been linked to human cancer. Collectively, these eight viruses cause over 20 different types of cancer and contribute to 10-12% of all cancer, with a greater burden in low- and middle-income countries. For many viruses, immunosuppression greatly increases the risks of persistent infection, development of chronic sequelae and cancer. Although several viruses share similar routes of transmission (especially sexual activity, injection drug use and mother-to-child transmission), the predominant route of transmission varies across viruses, and for the same virus can vary by geographical location. In general, vulnerable populations at the greatest risk for viral infections and their associated diseases include people, especially children, living in low- to middle-income countries, men who have sex with men, people who use injection drugs and female sex workers.This article is part of the themed issue 'Human oncogenic viruses'.

Indexed as

HumansOncogenic VirusesTumor Virus Infectionscancerepidemiologyviruses

Identifiers

PMID28893933
PMCPMC5597733
OpenAlexW2752996863

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.