Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23846313›Full record

ReviewEMBO reports2013

Cancer heterogeneity--a multifaceted view.

Felipe De Sousa E Melo, Louis Vermeulen, Evelyn Fessler, Jan Paul Medema

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in EMBO reports, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 136 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
136citing 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

136 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Principles and therapeutics of cancer.Molecules and cells · 2025
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Loss of XIST lncRNA unlocks stemness and cellular plasticity in ovarian cancer.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024
    Article
  20. Article

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

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

4 authors.

Felipe De Sousa E MeloLaboratory for Experimental Oncology & Radiobiology, Centre for Experimental Molecular Medicine, Academic Medical Centre, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Louis Vermeulen
Evelyn Fessler
Jan Paul Medema

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cancers of various organs have been categorized into distinct subtypes after increasingly sophisticated taxonomies. Additionally, within a seemingly homogeneous subclass, individual cancers contain diverse tumour cell populations that vary in important cancer-specific traits such as clonogenicity and invasive potential. Differences that exist between and within a given tumour type have hampered significantly both the proper selection of patients that might benefit from therapy, as well as the development of new targeted agents. In this review, we discuss the differences associated with organ-specific cancer subtypes and the factors that contribute to intra-tumour heterogeneity. It is of utmost importance to understand the biological causes that distinguish tumours as well as distinct tumour cell populations within malignancies, as these will ultimately point the way to more rational anti-cancer treatments.

Indexed as

Genetic HeterogeneityCell DifferentiationClonal EvolutionClone CellsGene ExpressionHumansMutationNeoplasm ProteinsNeoplasmsNeoplastic Stem CellsOrgan SpecificityTumor MicroenvironmentNeoplasm Proteins

Identifiers

PMID23846313
PMCPMC3736134

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.