ArticlePloS one2013
Elite model for the generation of induced pluripotent cancer cells (iPCs).
Article in PloS one, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Muse cells: ushering in a new era of stem cell-based therapy for stroke.Stem cell research & therapy · 2022Review
- Pluripotency Stemness and Cancer: More Questions than Answers.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2022Article
- Conversion of hepatoma cells to hepatocyte-like cells by defined hepatocyte nuclear factors.Cell research · 2019Article
- Incomplete cellular reprogramming of colorectal cancer cells elicits an epithelial/mesenchymal hybrid phenotype.Journal of biomedical science · 2018Article
- Melanoma-Derived iPCCs Show Differential Tumorigenicity and Therapy Response.Stem cell reports · 2017Article
- In vitro models of cancer stem cells and clinical applications.BMC cancer · 2016Review
- Application of induced pluripotency in cancer studies.Reports of practical oncology and radiotherapy : journal of Greatpoland Cancer Center in Poznan and Polish Society of Radiation OncologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The inefficiency of generating induced pluripotent somatic cells (iPS) engendered two contending models, namely the Stochastic model and Elite model. Although the former is more favorable to explain the inherent inefficiencies, it may be fallible to extrapolate the same working model to reprogramming of cancer cells. Indeed, tumor cells are known to be inherently heterogeneous with respect to distinctive characteristics thus providing a suitable platform to test whether the reprogramming process of cancer cells is biased. Here, we report our observations that all randomly picked induced pluripotent cancer cells (iPCs) established previously do not possess mutations known in the parental population. This unanticipated observation is most parsimoniously explained by the Elite model, whereby putative early tumor progenies were selected during induction to pluripotency.
Indexed as
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.