Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30194414›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Molecular cell biology2018

To degrade or not to degrade: mechanisms and significance of endocytic recycling.

Peter J Cullen, Florian Steinberg

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Molecular cell biology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 356 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
356citing papers in PubMed
22.6field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

356 citing papers in PubMed, 587 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Structural Mechanisms of DNAJC13 Dimeric Assembly and InsPbioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

296 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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 at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Peter J CullenSchool of Biochemistry, Biomedical Sciences Building, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK. pete.cullen@bristol.ac.uk.
Florian SteinbergCenter for Biological Systems Analysis, Albert Ludwigs Universitaet Freiburg, Freiburg im Breisgau, Germany. florian.steinberg@mail.zbsa.uni-freiburg.de.
University of Bristol · GBUniversity of Freiburg · DE

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/P018807/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Newly endocytosed integral cell surface proteins are typically either directed for degradation or subjected to recycling back to the plasma membrane. The sorting of integral cell surface proteins, including signalling receptors, nutrient transporters, ion channels, adhesion molecules and polarity markers, within the endolysosomal network for recycling is increasingly recognized as an essential feature in regulating the complexities of physiology at the cell, tissue and organism levels. Historically, endocytic recycling has been regarded as a relatively passive process, where the majority of internalized integral proteins are recycled via a nonspecific sequence-independent 'bulk membrane flow' pathway. Recent work has increasingly challenged this view. The discovery of sequence-specific sorting motifs and the identification of cargo adaptors and associated coat complexes have begun to uncover the highly orchestrated nature of endosomal cargo recycling, thereby providing new insight into the function and (patho)physiology of this process.

Indexed as

AnimalsCell MembraneEndocytosisEndosomesHumansMembrane ProteinsProtein TransportMembrane Proteins

Identifiers

PMID30194414
OpenAlexW2890393959

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.