Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29192213›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Cancer2018

Differentiation therapy revisited.

Hugues de Thé

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Cancer, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 274 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
274citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
14.2field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

274 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 443 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Retinoic acid in health and disease.Signal transduction and targeted therapy · 2026
    Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

214 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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Hugues de ThéCollège de France, PSL Research University, 75005 Paris; Université Paris Diderot, Sorbonne Paris Cité (INSERM UMR 944, Equipe Labellisée par la Ligue Nationale contre le Cancer; CNRS UMR 7212), Institut Universitaire d'Hématologie, 75010 Paris; and Assistance Publique/Hôpitaux de Paris, Oncologie Moléculaire, Hôpital St Louis, 75010 Paris, France.
Assistance Publique – Hôpitaux de Paris · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The concept of differentiation therapy emerged from the fact that hormones or cytokines may promote differentiation ex vivo, thereby irreversibly changing the phenotype of cancer cells. Its hallmark success has been the treatment of acute promyelocytic leukaemia (APL), a condition that is now highly curable by the combination of retinoic acid (RA) and arsenic. Recently, drugs that trigger differentiation in a variety of primary tumour cells have been identified, suggesting that they are clinically useful. This Opinion article analyses the basis for the clinical successes of RA or arsenic in APL by assessing the respective roles of terminal maturation and loss of self-renewal. By reviewing other successful examples of drug-induced tumour cell differentiation, novel approaches to transform differentiating drugs into more efficient therapies are proposed.

Indexed as

AnimalsAntineoplastic AgentsArsenic TrioxideCell DifferentiationHumansLeukemia, Promyelocytic, AcuteTretinoinAntineoplastic AgentsArsenic TrioxideTretinoin

Identifiers

PMID29192213
OpenAlexW4211173018

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.