ReviewFrontiers in oncology2017
Guidelines for Rational Cancer Therapeutics.
Review in Frontiers in oncology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Radiolabeling and PET-MRI microdosing of the experimental cancer therapeutic, MN-anti-miR10b, demonstrates delivery to metastatic lesions in a murine model of metastatic breast cancer.Cancer nanotechnology · 2021Article
- A promising anticancer drug: a photosensitizer based on the porphyrin skeleton.RSC medicinal chemistry · 2020Review
- A Review on (Hydro)Porphyrin-Loaded Polymer Micelles: Interesting and Valuable Platforms for Enhanced Cancer Nanotheranostics.Pharmaceutics · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Traditionally, cancer therapy has relied on surgery, radiation therapy, and chemotherapy. In recent years, these interventions have become increasingly replaced or complemented by more targeted approaches that are informed by a deeper understanding of the underlying biology. Still, the implementation of fully rational patient-specific drug design appears to be years away. Here, we present a vision of rational drug design for cancer that is defined by two major components: modularity and image guidance. We suggest that modularity can be achieved by combining a nanocarrier and an oligonucleotide component into the therapeutic. Image guidance can be incorporated into the nanocarrier component by labeling with a specific imaging reporter, such as a radionuclide or contrast agent for magnetic resonance imaging. While limited by the need for additional technological advancement in the areas of cancer biology, nanotechnology, and imaging, this vision for the future of cancer therapy can be used as a guide to future research endeavors.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.