Talk:Erlotinib

I've written a new page, not a copyvio. Terrace4 11:57, 22 August 2005 (UTC)

A good copyedit would do this entry a world of good

Lots of good content here. But a lot could be done to make this entry more accessible. I also see some pronoun reference problems, excessive jargon, and a rather stilted style that makes the content hard to understand.

Eperotao (talk) 18:58, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Quick comments about the mechanism section. It states that EGFR receptors autophosporylate each other following dimerization. Transphosphorylate would be more appropriate. There is indeed autophosphorylation in the activation mechanism but as the word says... it's AUTOphosphorylation, not on other receptor. I just think it's confusing to use that word. Also, at the end of the same section, it is written by inhibiting the ATP. The ATP is a molecule and by itself doesn't do much. It needs the catalytic activity of an enzyme to perform it's energy-related tasks. I think it would be better to say that the molecule (erlotinib) inhibits the intrinsic kinase domain of the protein (EGFR). Hope it can be useful to somebody...

I also agree with Eperotao on rendering this enry more accessible, specially to patients who use this drug as a cancer treatment.

I have absolutely no knowledge of wikipedia editing so sorry if I didn't just edit it.

Alexis — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.83.69.200 (talk) 18:35, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Common misconception in EGFR mechanism

"...These then use the molecule of ATP to trans-phosphorylate each other on tyrosine residues, which generates phosphotyrosine residues, recruiting the phosphotyrosine-binding proteins to EGFR..."

This is not true. EGFR activation mechanism is more like the Src/CDK-like kinases. It forms an asymmetric dimmer where 1 of the monomers functions as a cyclin, activating the other monomer. So, only 1 monomer has an active kinase domain. If someone doesn't refute me in due time, I'll cedit this part of the art. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.55.78.59 (talk) 12:45, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

source for that? Jytdog (talk) 13:37, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

minor problems

Interstitial pneumonitis & ingrown hairs are listed under common side effects but with "rarely" which is contradictory. Interstitial pneumonitis is also listed under both common & rare side effects. Typo - IGR-1R (towards end of Resistance to treatment) should obviously be IGF-1R. 69.72.92.34 (talk) 04:20, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Erlotinib. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060314180258/http://www.genzyme.com/corp/investors/GENZ%20PR-092705.asp to http://www.genzyme.com/corp/investors/GENZ%20PR-092705.asp
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://cancergrace.org/lung/2011/02/21/faq-egfr-inhibitor-rash-assoc/%27%27FAQ%3A
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.cancer.gov/clinicaltrials/results/lung-and-erlotinib0604l
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081012081613/http://www.roche.com/med-cor-2007-10-22 to http://www.roche.com/med-cor-2007-10-22
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110726060413/http://www.roche.com/med-cor-2009-05-30b to http://www.roche.com/med-cor-2009-05-30b

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:43, 22 September 2017 (UTC)