Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29091800›Full record

ReviewNeoplasia (New York, N.Y.)2017

Nothing But NET: A Review of Neuroendocrine Tumors and Carcinomas.

Bryan Oronsky, Patrick C Ma, Daniel Morgensztern, Corey A Carter

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Neoplasia (New York, N.Y.), 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 423 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
423citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

423 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Prognostic value of the dual-tracer PET score (NETPET) in neuroendocrine tumors with [European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2026
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Clinical research analysis of [European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2026
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

363 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

4 authors.

Bryan OronskyEpicentRx Inc, 4445 Eastgate Mall, Suite 200, San Diego, CA 92121, USA. Electronic address: boronsky@epicentrx.com.
Patrick C MaWest Virginia University, Mary Babb Randolph Cancer Center, 8901 Wisconsin Ave., PO Box 9162, Morgantown, WV 26506, USA.
Daniel MorgenszternWashington University School of Medicine, Division of Oncology, 660 S. Euclid, Box 8056, St. Louis, MO 63110, USA.
Corey A CarterWalter Reed National Military Medical Center, 8901 Wisconsin Ave., Bethesda, MD 20889, USA.

Funding

West Virginia IDEA-CTRU54GM104942 · NIGMS · WEST VIRGINIA UNIVERSITY · PI Laura F. Gibson · 2012 to 2026
$81.0M
NIGMS NIH HHS U54 GM104942
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This review covers the diverse topic of neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs), a relatively rare and heterogeneous tumor type, comprising ~2% of all malignancies, with a prevalence of <200,000 in the United States, which makes it an orphan disease (Basu et al., 2010).

Indexed as

AlgorithmsAnimalsBiomarkers, TumorCarcinoma, NeuroendocrineDisease ManagementDisease SusceptibilityHumansNeoplasm GradingNeoplasm StagingNeuroendocrine TumorsBiomarkers, Tumor

Identifiers

PMID29091800
PMCPMC5678742

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.