Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23512659›Full record

ArticleGenes & development2013

Widespread resetting of DNA methylation in glioblastoma-initiating cells suppresses malignant cellular behavior in a lineage-dependent manner.

Stefan H Stricker, Andrew Feber, Pär G Engström, Helena Carén, Kathreena M Kurian, Yasuhiro Takashima, Colin Watts, Michael Way, Peter Dirks, Paul Bertone and 3 more

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Genes & development, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 92 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
92citing 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

92 citing papers in PubMed, 137 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Merits and challenges of iPSC-derived organoids for clinical applications.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2023
    Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Future Match Making: When Pediatric Oncology Meets Organoid Technology.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2021
    Review

32 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors at 8 institutions in 6 countries.

Stefan H StrickerDepartment of Cancer Biology, UCL Cancer Institute, University College London, London WC1E 6BT, United Kingdom.
Andrew Feber
Pär G Engström
Helena Carén
Kathreena M Kurian
Yasuhiro Takashima
Colin Watts
Michael Way
Peter Dirks
Paul Bertone
Austin Smith
Stephan Beck
Steven M Pollard
University College London · GBStem Cell Institute · PAUniversity of Cambridge · GBBioinformatics Institute · RUCancer Research UK · GBCRUK Lung Cancer Centre of Excellence · GBFrenchay Hospital · GBHospital for Sick Children · CA

Funding

Cancer Research UK 15155Cancer Research UK C25858/A9160Medical Research Council G1001028Medical Research Council G108/507Medical Research Council G1100526Medical Research Council MC_PC_12009Wellcome Trust 079249Wellcome Trust 084071
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Epigenetic changes are frequently observed in cancer. However, their role in establishing or sustaining the malignant state has been difficult to determine due to the lack of experimental tools that enable resetting of epigenetic abnormalities. To address this, we applied induced pluripotent stem cell (iPSC) reprogramming techniques to invoke widespread epigenetic resetting of glioblastoma (GBM)-derived neural stem (GNS) cells. GBM iPSCs (GiPSCs) were subsequently redifferentiated to the neural lineage to assess the impact of cancer-specific epigenetic abnormalities on tumorigenicity. GiPSCs and their differentiating derivatives display widespread resetting of common GBM-associated changes, such as DNA hypermethylation of promoter regions of the cell motility regulator TES (testis-derived transcript), the tumor suppressor cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor 1C (CDKN1C; p57KIP2), and many polycomb-repressive complex 2 (PRC2) target genes (e.g., SFRP2). Surprisingly, despite such global epigenetic reconfiguration, GiPSC-derived neural progenitors remained highly malignant upon xenotransplantation. Only when GiPSCs were directed to nonneural cell types did we observe sustained expression of reactivated tumor suppressors and reduced infiltrative behavior. These data suggest that imposing an epigenome associated with an alternative developmental lineage can suppress malignant behavior. However, in the context of the neural lineage, widespread resetting of GBM-associated epigenetic abnormalities is not sufficient to override the cancer genome.

Indexed as

DNA MethylationEpigenesis, GeneticAnimalsCell DifferentiationCell LineageCell Line, TumorCell Transformation, NeoplasticCellular ReprogrammingGene Expression ProfilingGene Expression Regulation, NeoplasticGlioblastomaHumansMiceMice, Inbred NODNeural Stem CellsPluripotent Stem Cells

Identifiers

PMID23512659
PMCPMC3613612
OpenAlexW2148485334

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.