Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29958271›Full record

ArticlePloS one2018

Physiological random processes in precision cancer therapy.

Nick Henscheid, Eric Clarkson, Kyle J Myers, Harrison H Barrett

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

4 authors.

Nick HenscheidCenter for Gamma-Ray Imaging, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-9361-6976
Eric ClarksonCenter for Gamma-Ray Imaging, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, United States of America.
Kyle J MyersCenter for Devices and Radiological Health, Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, MD, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-7394-4932
Harrison H BarrettCenter for Gamma-Ray Imaging, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, United States of America.

Funding

CENTER FOR GAMMA RAY IMAGINGP41EB002035 · NIBIB · UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA · PI BARRETT, HARRISON H, FURENLID, LARS R · 2003 to 2018
$17.7M
SPECT Imaging and Parallel ComputingR01EB000803 · NIBIB · UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA · PI CAUCCI, LUCA · 2012 to 2020
$4.2M
NIBIB NIH HHS P41 EB002035NIBIB NIH HHS R01 EB000803
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Many different physiological processes affect the growth of malignant lesions and their response to therapy. Each of these processes is spatially and genetically heterogeneous; dynamically evolving in time; controlled by many other physiological processes, and intrinsically random and unpredictable. The objective of this paper is to show that all of these properties of cancer physiology can be treated in a unified, mathematically rigorous way via the theory of random processes. We treat each physiological process as a random function of position and time within a tumor, defining the joint statistics of such functions via the infinite-dimensional characteristic functional. The theory is illustrated by analyzing several models of drug delivery and response of a tumor to therapy. To apply the methodology to precision cancer therapy, we use maximum-likelihood estimation with Emission Computed Tomography (ECT) data to estimate unknown patient-specific physiological parameters, ultimately demonstrating how to predict the probability of tumor control for an individual patient undergoing a proposed therapeutic regimen.

Indexed as

Models, BiologicalNeoplasmsTomography, Emission-ComputedAntineoplastic AgentsDrug Delivery SystemsHumansAntineoplastic Agents

Identifiers

PMID29958271
PMCPMC6025881

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC0
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.