Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34685565›Full record

ReviewCells2021

Mechanisms and Clinical Significance of Tumor Lymphatic Invasion.

Noriki Fujimoto, Lothar C Dieterich

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cells, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
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

32 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 45 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Upregulation ofInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Molecular Underpinnings of Brain Metastases.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Noriki FujimotoDepartment of Dermatology, Shiga University of Medical Science, Otsu 520-2192, Japan.
Lothar C DieterichInstitute of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH) Zurich, Vladimir-Prelog-Weg 1-5/10, 8093 Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0001-7908-5710
ETH Zurich · CHShiga University of Medical Science · JP

Funding

Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule Zürich SEED-71 16-1Krebsliga Zürich n.a.Vontobel-Stiftung n.a.
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Tumor-associated lymphatic vessels play an important role in tumor progression, mediating lymphatic dissemination of malignant cells to tumor-draining lymph nodes and regulating tumor immunity. An early, necessary step in the lymphatic metastasis cascade is the invasion of lymphatic vessels by tumor cell clusters or single tumor cells. In this review, we discuss our current understanding of the underlying cellular and molecular mechanisms, which include tumor-specific as well as normal, developmental and immunological processes "hijacked" by tumor cells to gain access to the lymphatic system. Furthermore, we summarize the prognostic value of lymphatic invasion, discuss its relationship with local recurrence, lymph node and distant metastasis, and highlight potential therapeutic options and challenges.

Indexed as

HumansLymphatic MetastasisLymphatic VesselsPrognosislymphatic endothelial celllymphatic invasionlymph nodemetastasistumor lymphangiogenesis

Identifiers

PMID34685565
PMCPMC8533989
OpenAlexW3202651998

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.