Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18058078›Full record

ReviewDer Hautarzt; Zeitschrift fur Dermatologie, Venerologie, und verwandte Gebiete2008

[Relevance of cell culture models in cutaneous tumour biology. Part I: tumour cell lines].

J Hatina, T Ruzicka

Abstract readEnglish AbstractReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Der Hautarzt; Zeitschrift fur Dermatologie, Venerologie, und verwandte Gebiete, 2008. 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

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.

J HatinaForschungslabor der Urologischen Klinik, Universitätsklinikum Düsseldorf. Jiri.Hatina@lfp.cuni.cz
T Ruzicka

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma, basal cell carcinoma and melanoma, much like all other human solid tumors, result from a multi-step process in which genetic and epigenetic changes accumulate in the affected cells. Insight into the biology of human tumors is a requirement for developing effective therapies. Cell culture models are a very valuable experimental system. The degree of tumorigenic transformation can be precisely defined. Tumor cell lines display similar functional hierarchy as tumors or tissues in vivo and can, consequently, provide a crucial source of minor cell subsets, like tumor stem cells. Progression series of clonally related cell lines offer the opportunity to follow the process of sequential acquisition of transformation-related traits up to the development of properties with direct clinical equivalents, like tumorigenicity and metastatic competence. These phenotypical changes can be directly correlated with changes at the genome level, concerning both gene structure and expression. While for most studies, human transformed cell lines are the model of choice, there are questions for which animal cell lines are strongly preferred, such as interactions between the tumor and the immune system. To properly interpret the results of all experiments with classical two-dimensional cell culture, a possible danger of artifacts due to grossly unnatural environment must be constantly taken into account. It is thus obligatory to confirm any such result with other experimental models like complex three-dimensional culture models or experimental animals, and with clinical samples.

Indexed as

Disease Models, AnimalAnimalsCell Line, TumorHumansSkin Neoplasms

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.