ReviewAIMS genetics2018
Esophageal cancer research today and tomorrow: Lessons from algae and other perspectives.
Review in AIMS genetics, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Exploratory characterization of IgG1/IgG4 glycosylation and monocyte-derived dendritic cell responses in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Article
- Prognostic model construction and validation of esophageal cancer cellular senescence-related genes and correlation with immune infiltration.Frontiers in surgery · 2023Article
- Article
- Plasma-metabolite-based machine learning is a promising diagnostic approach for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma investigation.Journal of pharmaceutical analysis · 2021Article
- Kissing tumors; the concurrent diagnosis of leiomyosarcoma and squamous cell carcinoma of the esophagus.BMC surgery · 2021Article
- Role of VEGFs/VEGFR-1 Signaling and its Inhibition in Modulating Tumor Invasion: Experimental Evidence in Different Metastatic Cancer Models.International journal of molecular sciences · 2020Review
- Clinical-morphological profiles of esophageal carcinoma's main types.Romanian journal of morphology and embryology = Revue roumaine de morphologie et embryologieArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Esophageal cancer is an increasing concern due to poor prognosis, aggressive disease modalities, and a lack of efficient therapeutics. The two types of esophageal cancer: esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) and esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) are responsible for an estimated 450,000 annual deaths, with over 457,000 new patients diagnosed in 2015, making it the eighth most prevalent and the 10th most fatal cancer worldwide. As esophageal cancer prevalence continues to increase, and so does the pressing need for the development of new and effective strategies for the early diagnostics, prevention, and treatment of this cancer, as well for building the innovative research tools to understand the affected molecular mechanisms. This short review summarizes the current statistics and recent research of the problems and solutions related to the esophageal cancer, and offer a brief overview of its epidemiology, molecular alterations, and existing biomedical tools. We will discuss currently available research tools and discuss selected approaches we deem relevant to find new model systems and therapies for the future with the special focus on novel opportunities presented by the unique molecules found in algae, namely carbohydrates and lipids. Their remarkable chemical variability is connected to their striking structural and functional properties, which combined with the relative novelty of these compounds to cancer biology, warrants interest of the wide biomedical community to these molecules, especially in the esophageal cancer theory and practice.
Indexed as
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.