Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29983889›Full record

ArticleOncotarget2018

Advantage of

Gustavo Noriz Berardinelli, Cristovam Scapulatempo-Neto, Ronílson Durães, Marco Antônio de Oliveira, Denise Guimarães, Rui Manuel Reis

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Oncotarget, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

33 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 46 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Accuracy and Clinical Relevance of Intra-TumoralDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Article
  20. 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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Gustavo Noriz BerardinelliMolecular Oncology Research Center, Barretos Cancer Hospital, Barretos, São Paulo, Brazil.
Cristovam Scapulatempo-NetoMolecular Oncology Research Center, Barretos Cancer Hospital, Barretos, São Paulo, Brazil.
Ronílson DurãesMolecular Oncology Research Center, Barretos Cancer Hospital, Barretos, São Paulo, Brazil.
Marco Antônio de OliveiraNucleus of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Barretos Cancer Hospital, Barretos, São Paulo, Brazil.
Denise GuimarãesMolecular Oncology Research Center, Barretos Cancer Hospital, Barretos, São Paulo, Brazil.
Rui Manuel ReisMolecular Oncology Research Center, Barretos Cancer Hospital, Barretos, São Paulo, Brazil.
Hospital de Câncer de Barretos · BRUniversity of Minho · PT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a leading cause of cancer death worldwide. Microsatellite instability (MSI) is a genetic pathway leading to CRC, associated with particular clinicopathological features, and recently a major biomarker of immunotherapy response. There is little information the frequency MSI among Brazilian CRC patients, and it is still debatable the ideal methodology for MSI screening in countries with limited resources. We proposed to evaluate MSI by molecular and immunohistochemistry (IHC) methods, to compare both methodologies and also to assess the inclusion of a novel microsatellite marker,

Indexed as

colorectal cancerHSP110 (T17)immunohistochemistrymicrosatellite instabilitymolecular diagnostic

Identifiers

PMID29983889
PMCPMC6033349
OpenAlexW2809528751

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.