Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30123819›Full record

ArticleGenes & diseases2016

Cancer stem cells and HER2 positive breast cancer: The story so far.

Deep Shah, Clodia Osipo

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Genes & diseases, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing 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

33 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Nuclear Factor-κB Clinical Significance in Breast Cancer: An Immunohistochemical Study.Medical principles and practice : international journal of the Kuwait University, Health Science Centre · 2023
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Wnt Signaling in the Breast: From Development to Disease.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2022
    Review
  18. Article
  19. 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

2 authors.

Deep ShahDepartment of Molecular Pharmacology and Therapeutics, Oncology Research Institute, Loyola University Chicago, Maywood, IL 60153, USA.
Clodia OsipoDepartment of Microbiology and Immunology, Oncology Research Institute, Loyola University Chicago, Maywood, IL 60153, USA.

Funding

Regulation of Notch Signaling by ErbB-2: Novel Therapeutic StrategyR01CA160378 · NCI · LOYOLA UNIVERSITY CHICAGO · PI OSIPO, CLODIA · 2012 to 2016
$1.5M
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA160378
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor type 2 (HER2) gene amplification and/or protein overexpression is observed in patients suffering from HER2+ breast cancer. This subtype of breast cancer has improved prognosis due to availability of anti-HER2 therapy. However, drug resistance and tumor recurrence still remains a major concern. Cancer Stem Cells (CSCs) are believed to constitute the subset of cell population that is resistant to drug treatment and possesses characteristics of stem cells. CSCs enable the tumors to thrive despite major insults. This review provides a comprehensive idea about the concept of CSCs in context of HER2+ breast cancer by providing the description of the markers that are used for the identification of CSCs and by elucidating the signaling pathways that are associated with HER2+ breast CSCs. Furthermore, the review also describes the interaction of HER2 with those signaling pathways and the future of targeting CSCs in HER2+ breast cancer.

Indexed as

Breast cancerCancer stem cells (CSCs)Drug resistanceHuman epidermal growth factor receptor type 2 (HER2)Signaling pathways

Identifiers

PMID30123819
PMCPMC6095671

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.