Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19279687›Full record

ArticlePloS one2009

Signatures of selection in fusion transcripts resulting from chromosomal translocations in human cancer.

Iñigo Ortiz de Mendíbil, José L Vizmanos, Francisco J Novo

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 31% 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Analysis of CD74 Occurrence in Oncogenic Fusion Proteins.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Molecular Signatures of Fusion Proteins in Cancer.ACS pharmacology & translational science · 2019
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. 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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Iñigo Ortiz de MendíbilDepartment of Genetics, University of Navarra, Pamplona, Spain.
José L Vizmanos
Francisco J Novo
Universidad de Navarra · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe recurrence and non-random distribution of translocation breakpoints in human tumors are usually attributed to local sequence features present in the vicinity of the breakpoints. However, it has also been suggested that functional constraints might contribute to delimit the position of translocation breakpoints within the genes involved, but a quantitative analysis of such contribution has been lacking. METHODOLOGY: We have analyzed two well-known signatures of functional selection, such as reading-frame compatibility and non-random combinations of protein domains, on an extensive dataset of fusion proteins resulting from chromosomal translocations in cancer.

conclusionsOur data provide strong experimental support for the concept that the position of translocation breakpoints in the genome of cancer cells is determined, to a large extent, by the need to combine certain protein domains and to keep an intact reading frame in fusion transcripts. Additionally, the information that we have assembled affords a global view of the oncogenic mechanisms and domain architectures that are used by fusion proteins. This can be used to assess the functional impact of novel chromosomal translocations and to predict the position of breakpoints in the genes involved.

Indexed as

Translocation, GeneticHumansNeoplasmsOncogene Proteins, FusionOpen Reading FramesRNA, MessengerOncogene Proteins, FusionRNA, Messenger

Identifiers

PMID19279687
PMCPMC2653638
OpenAlexW2042171851

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.