ArticleCancer chemotherapy and pharmacology2020
NUC-1031 in biliary tract cancer: from bench to bedside and back?
Article in Cancer chemotherapy and pharmacology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Advanced prodrug strategies in nucleoside analogues targeting the treatment of gastrointestinal malignancies.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2023Review
- The Novel Nucleoside Analogue ProTide NUC-7738 Overcomes Cancer Resistance MechanismsClinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research · 2021Article
- Cholangiocarcinoma: bridging the translational gap from preclinical to clinical development and implications for future therapy.Expert opinion on investigational drugs · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In preclinical models of biliary tract cancer, NUC-1031 showed less potency than gemcitabine, no correlation with potential biomarkers and only moderate additive interaction in combination with cisplatin. These findings should prompt further careful pharmacological and translational studies to better define the purported therapeutic advantage of NUC-1031 over gemcitabine. That would be a more cautious approach than the phase III clinical trial which is planning to enrol 828 patients with biliary tract tumours to compare gemcitabine/cisplatin "conventional" treatment with or without NUC-1031.
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.