Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24378802›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Drug discovery2014

Therapeutic targeting of EPH receptors and their ligands.

Andrew W Boyd, Perry F Bartlett, Martin Lackmann

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Drug discovery, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 200 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
200citing 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

200 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Novel recurrently mutated genes in African American colon cancers.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2015
    Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Eph receptor signaling complexes in the plasma membrane.Trends in biochemical sciences · 2024
    Review
  20. Review

140 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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.

Andrew W BoydLeukaemia Foundation Research Laboratory, Queensland Institute of Medical Research, 300 Herston Road, Brisbane, Queensland 4029, Australia.
Perry F BartlettQueensland Brain Institute, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland 4072, Australia.
Martin LackmannDepartment of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Monash University, Victoria 3800, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Critical roles for EPH receptor (EPH)-ephrin signalling in a range of chronic and regenerative diseases are increasingly being recognized. In particular, the complex roles of EPHs and ephrins in tumour growth and progression, and in nerve injury and regeneration have been studied extensively. This has led to considerable progress in developing strategies for their therapeutic targeting, with some anticancer agents already in clinical trials. Promising leads for non-malignant diseases are also emerging, with compelling preclinical data encouraging clinical development. We discuss this rapidly developing area of drug discovery, highlighting the associated challenges and limitations.

Indexed as

EphrinsHumansInflammationModels, BiologicalMolecular Targeted TherapyNeoplasmsNervous System DiseasesReceptors, Eph FamilyRegenerationSignal TransductionEphrinsReceptors, Eph Family

Identifiers

PMID24378802

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
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 Socratic graph.