ReviewEXCLI journal2020
Why we do what we do. A brief analysis of cancer therapies.
Review in EXCLI journal, 2020. 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.
- Impact of targeting the platelet-activating factor and its receptor in cancer treatment.Military Medical Research · 2025Review
- A novel machine learning-based cancer-specific cardiovascular disease risk score among patients with breast, colorectal, or lung cancer.JNCI cancer spectrum · 2025Article
- Natural Compounds and Breast Cancer: Chemo-Preventive and Therapeutic Capabilities of Chlorogenic Acid and Cinnamaldehyde.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Exploring Anti-Breast Cancer Effects of LiveInternational journal of breast cancer · 2024Article
- Dendrimers: Advancements and Potential Applications in Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment-An Overview.Pharmaceutics · 2023Review
- Review
- Chronic Low-Grade Inflammation Precedes Early Locoregional Recurrence following Mastectomy in Low-Risk Early-Stage Breast Cancer: A Longitudinal Case Report.Case reports in oncologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The goal of all medical activity is to preserve health in fit people, and to restore the sick into a state of complete physical, mental and social wellbeing. In an effort to determine whether we are achieving this last goal in oncology, herein we review the biological and clinical framework that has led to the foundations of the current anticancer treatment paradigm. Currently, cancer therapy is still based on the ancient axiom that states that the complete eradication of the tumor burden is the only way to achieve a cure. This strategy has led to a substantial improvement in survival rates as cancer mortality rates have dropped in an unprecedented way. Despite this progress, more than 9 million people still die from cancer every year, indicating that the current treatment strategy is not leading to a cancer cure, but to a cancer remission, that is "the temporary absence of manifestations of a particular disease"; after months or years of remission, in most patients, cancer will inevitably recur. Our critical analysis indicates that it is time to discuss about the new key challenges and future directions in clinical oncology. We need to generate novel treatment strategies more suited to the current clinical reality.
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.