Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39387476›Full record

ArticleCancer medicine2024

RETRACTION: MCCK1 enhances the anticancer effect of temozolomide in attenuating the invasion, migration and epithelial-mesenchymal transition of glioblastoma cells in vitro and in vivo.

Abstract readRetraction Notice
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

0 authors.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Retraction: T. Liu, A. Li, Y. Xu, and Y. Xin, "MCCK1 Enhances the Anticancer Effect of Temozolomide in Attenuating the Invasion, Migration and Epithelial-Mesenchymal Transition of Glioblastoma Cells in Vitro and in Vivo," Cancer Medicine 8, no. 2 (2019): 751-760. https://doi.org/10.1002/cam4.1951. The above article, published online on 18 January 2019, in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com), has been retracted by agreement between the authors, the journal Editor-in-Chief, Stephen Tait, and John Wiley & Sons Ltd. A report submitted by a third party noted image duplications with other articles by different author groups. Specifically, the report found image duplications with other published articles in Figures 1E, 2B, 3A, 3D and 4C. The report also found image overlap between images in Figure 3A. The retraction has been agreed to because the evidence of image duplication across different articles, each of which describes different experimental conditions, fundamentally compromises the editors' confidence in the conclusions presented. The authors have voluntarily agreed with the retraction.

Identifiers

PMID39387476
PMCPMC11465276

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.