ArticleCancer cell international2012
Is systems biology a promising approach to resolve controversies in cancer research?
Article in Cancer cell international, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Paradoxical Behavior of Oncogenes Undermines the Somatic Mutation Theory.Biomolecules · 2022Article
- Can the Mitochondrial Metabolic Theory Explain Better the Origin and Management of Cancer than Can the Somatic Mutation Theory?Metabolites · 2021Article
- Press-pulse: a novel therapeutic strategy for the metabolic management of cancer.Nutrition & metabolism · 2017Article
- The Significance of an Enhanced Concept of the Organism for Medicine.Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM · 2016Review
- In search of principles for a Theory of Organisms.Journal of biosciences · 2015Article
- The authors reply.American journal of epidemiology · 2015Article
- Competing views on cancer.Journal of biosciences · 2014Article
- Cancer as a metabolic disease: implications for novel therapeutics.Carcinogenesis · 2014Review
- Tumor and the microenvironment: a chance to reframe the paradigm of carcinogenesis?BioMed research international · 2014Review
- The aging of the 2000 and 2011 Hallmarks of Cancer reviews: a critique.Journal of biosciences · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
At the beginning of the 21st century cancer research has reached an impasse similar to that experienced in developmental biology in the first decades of the 20th century when conflicting results and interpretations co-existed for a long time until these differences were resolved and contradictions were eliminated. In cancer research, instead of this healthy "weeding-out" process, there have been attempts to reach a premature synthesis, while no hypothesis is being rejected. Systems Biology could help cancer research to overcome this stalemate by resolving contradictions and identifying spurious data. First, in silico experiments should allow cancer researchers to be bold and a priori reject sets of data and hypotheses in order to gain a deeper understanding of how each dataset and each hypothesis contributes to the overall picture. In turn, this process should generate novel hypotheses and rules, which could be explored using these in silico approaches. These activities are significantly less costly and much faster than "wet-experiments". Consequently, Systems Biology could be advantageously used both as a heuristic tool to guide "wet-experiments" and to refine hypotheses and test predictions.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.