Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20707805›Full record

ArticleCancer science2010

Characterization of the epithelial cell adhesion molecule (EpCAM)+ cell population in hepatocellular carcinoma cell lines.

Osamu Kimura, Takeshi Takahashi, Naoto Ishii, Yuki Inoue, Yoshiyuki Ueno, Takayuki Kogure, Koji Fukushima, Masaaki Shiina, Yoko Yamagiwa, Yasuteru Kondo and 6 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer science, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 48 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
48citing papers in PubMed
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

48 citing papers in PubMed, 85 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Regulation of mTOR signaling by long non-coding RNA.Biochimica et biophysica acta. Gene regulatory mechanisms · 2020
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

16 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Osamu KimuraDepartment of Microbiology and Immunology, Tohoku University Graduate School of Medicine, Sendai, Japan.
Takeshi Takahashi
Naoto Ishii
Yuki Inoue
Yoshiyuki Ueno
Takayuki Kogure
Koji Fukushima
Masaaki Shiina
Yoko Yamagiwa
Yasuteru Kondo
Jun Inoue
Eiji Kakazu
Takao Iwasaki
Naoki Kawagishi
Tooru Shimosegawa
Kazuo Sugamura
University Gastroenterology · USTohoku University · JPMiyagi Prefectural Hospital Organization · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Accumulating evidence suggests that cancer stem cells (CSC) play an important role in tumorigenicity. Epithelial cell adhesion molecule (EpCAM) is one of the markers that identifies tumor cells with high tumorigenicity. The expression of EpCAM in liver progenitor cells prompted us to investigate whether CSC could be identified in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) cell lines. The sorted EpCAM(+) subpopulation from HCC cell lines showed a greater colony formation rate than the sorted EpCAM(-) subpopulation from the same cell lines, although cell proliferation was comparable between the two subpopulations. The in vivo evaluation of tumorigenicity, using supra-immunodeficient NOD/scid/γc(null) (NOG) mice, revealed that a smaller number of EpCAM(+) cells (minimum 100) than EpCAM(-) cells was necessary for tumor formation. The bifurcated differentiation of EpCAM(+) cell clones into both EpCAM(+) and EpCAM(-) cells was obvious both in vitro and in vivo, but EpCAM(-) clones sustained their phenotype. These clonal analyses suggested that EpCAM(+) cells may contain a multipotent cell population. Interestingly, the introduction of exogenous EpCAM into EpCAM(+) clones, but not into EpCAM(-) clones, markedly enhanced their tumor-forming ability, even though both transfectants expressed a similar level of EpCAM. Therefore, the difference in the tumor-forming ability between EpCAM(+) and EpCAM(-) cells is probably due to the intrinsic biological differences between them. Collectively, our results suggest that the EpCAM(+) population is biologically quite different from the EpCAM(-) population in HCC cell lines, and preferentially contains a highly tumorigenic cell population with the characteristics of CSC.

Indexed as

AnimalsAntigens, NeoplasmCarcinoma, HepatocellularCell Adhesion MoleculesCell Line, TumorEpithelial Cell Adhesion MoleculeHumansLiver NeoplasmsMiceNeoplastic Stem CellsProtein Structure, TertiaryAntigens, NeoplasmCell Adhesion MoleculesEPCAM protein, humanEpithelial Cell Adhesion Molecule

Identifiers

PMID20707805
PMCPMC11159121
OpenAlexW2083436857

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.