Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31824863›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in oncology2019

Emerging Translational Opportunities in Comparative Oncology With Companion Canine Cancers: Radiation Oncology.

Michael W Nolan, Michael S Kent, Mary-Keara Boss

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in oncology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing 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

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. 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

3 authors.

Michael W NolanDepartment of Clinical Sciences, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC, United States.
Michael S KentDepartment of Surgical and Radiological Sciences, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of California, Davis, Davis, CA, United States.
Mary-Keara BossDepartment of Environmental and Radiological Health Sciences, Flint Animal Cancer Center, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

It is estimated that more than 6 million pet dogs are diagnosed with cancer annually in the USA. Both primary care and specialist veterinarians are frequently called upon to provide clinical care that improves the quality and/or quantity of life for affected animals. Because these cancers develop spontaneously in animals that often share the same environment as their owners, have intact immune systems and are of similar size to humans, and because the diagnostic tests and treatments for these cancers are similar to those used for management of human cancers, canine cancer provides an opportunity for research that simultaneously helps improve both canine and human health care. This is especially true in the field of radiation oncology, for which there is a rich and continually evolving history of learning from the careful study of pet dogs undergoing various forms of radiotherapy. The purpose of this review article is to inform readers of the potential utility and limitations of using dogs in that manner; the peer-reviewed literature will be critically reviewed, and current research efforts will be discussed. The article concludes with a look toward promising future directions and applications of this pet dog "model."

Indexed as

animal models of cancercanine comparative radiation oncologyimagingmedical physicsradiation oncologyradiobiologytheranosticstranslational research

Identifiers

PMID31824863
PMCPMC6883487

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.