Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29900123›Full record

ReviewWorld journal of clinical oncology2018

Epitranscriptomics of cancer.

Marina Tusup, Thomas Kundig, Steve Pascolo

Open access · diamondAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in World journal of clinical oncology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 17% 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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Role of main RNA modifications in cancer: NSignal transduction and targeted therapy · 2022
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Epigenetics of lung cancer: a translational perspective.Cellular oncology (Dordrecht, Netherlands) · 2019
    Review
  15. mJournal of translational medicine · 2019
    Article
  16. Review
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 2 countries.

Marina TusupDepartment of Dermatology, University Hospital of Zürich, Zurich 8091, Switzerland.
Thomas KundigDepartment of Dermatology, University Hospital of Zürich, Zurich 8091, Switzerland.
Steve PascoloDepartment of Dermatology, University Hospital of Zürich, Zurich 8091, Switzerland.
University of Zurich · CHUniversity Hospital of Zurich · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The functional impact of modifications of cellular RNAs, including mRNAs, miRNAs and lncRNAs, is a field of intense study. The role of such modifications in cancer has started to be elucidated. Diverse and sometimes opposite effects of RNA modifications have been reported. Some RNA modifications promote, while others decrease the growth and invasiveness of cancer. The present manuscript reviews the current knowledge on the potential impacts of N6-Methyladenosine, Pseudouridine, Inosine, 2'O-methylation or methylcytidine in cancer's RNA. It also highlights the remaining questions and provides hints on research avenues and potential therapeutic applications, whereby modulating dynamic RNA modifications may be a new method to treat cancer.

Indexed as

2’O-methylation or methylcytidine5-methylcytidineInosineN6-methyladenosinePseudouridineRNA modifications

Identifiers

PMID29900123
PMCPMC5997933
OpenAlexW2807609669

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.