ArticleOncology reports2019
[Corrigendum] Daily or weekly dosing with EGFR inhibitors, gefitinib and lapatinib, and AKT inhibitor MK2206 in mammary cancer models.
Article in Oncology reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Erratum for
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The AKT inhibitor employed in this article was identified as MK 2206 (8‑[4‑(1‑aminocyclobutyl) phenyl]‑9‑phenyl‑1,2,4‑ triazolo[3,4‑f][1,6]naphthyridin‑3(2H)‑one hydrochloride (1:2). However, another AKT inhibitor was actually used, which is typically identified as Akt I‑1,2 (HC,I. IPA (2‑[4‑(3‑phenylquinoxalin‑2‑yl)phenyl]propan‑2‑amine hydrochloride isopropanol (1:1:1). Therefore, all references to MK 2206 in the paper should have been made to Akt I‑1.2. Based on the experience of the present authors with a range of targeted inhibitors, it is expected that both inhibitors would have given rise to similar results; therefore, the results obtained in the paper are not likely to have been greatly affected as a consequence of the use of the alternative inhibitor. The authors regret that this error was not identified sooner, prior to the publication of the article, and regret any inconvenience that has been caused. [the original article was published in Oncology Reports 40: 1545‑1553, 2018; DOI: 110.3892/or.2018.6313].
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.