ArticleCancer informatics2013
Are the somatic mutation and tissue organization field theories of carcinogenesis incompatible?
Article in Cancer informatics, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evolution of Bioelectric Membrane Potentials: Implications in Cancer Pathogenesis and Therapeutic Strategies.The Journal of membrane biology · 2024Review
- Initiation of Cancer: The Journey From Mutations in Somatic Cells to Epigenetic Changes in Tissue-resident VSELs.Stem cell reviews and reports · 2024Review
- Mutation or not, what directly establishes a neoplastic state, namely cellular immortality and autonomy, still remains unknown and should be prioritized in our research.Journal of Cancer · 2022Review
- Towards the First Principles in Biology and Cancer: New Vistas in Computational Systems Biology of Cancer.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- Towards in-vivo label-free detection of brain tumor margins with epi-illumination tomographic quantitative phase imaging.Biomedical optics express · 2021Article
- Over a century of cancer research: Inconvenient truths and promising leads.PLoS biology · 2020Article
- Process analysis of carcinogenesis: concept derivation of the tissue function "preservation of a homogeneous gene expression".Theory in biosciences = Theorie in den Biowissenschaften · 2018Article
- An Emergence Framework of Carcinogenesis.Frontiers in oncology · 2017Article
- Genomics, microRNA, epigenetics, and proteomics for future diagnosis, treatment and monitoring response in upper GI cancers.Clinical and translational medicine · 2016Review
- The hallmarks of premalignant conditions: a molecular basis for cancer prevention.Seminars in oncology · 2016Review
- Exome sequencing of a colorectal cancer family reveals shared mutation pattern and predisposition circuitry along tumor pathways.Frontiers in genetics · 2015Article
- Multilevel modeling and value of information in clinical trial decision support.BMC systems biology · 2014Article
- Epistemology of the origin of cancer: a new paradigm.BMC cancer · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Two drastically different approaches to understanding the forces driving carcinogenesis have crystallized through years of research. These are the somatic mutation theory (SMT) and the tissue organization field theory (TOFT). The essence of SMT is that cancer is derived from a single somatic cell that has successively accumulated multiple DNA mutations, and that those mutations occur on genes which control cell proliferation and cell cycle. Thus, according to SMT, neoplastic lesions are the results of DNA-level events. Conversely, according to TOFT, carcinogenesis is primarily a problem of tissue organization: carcinogenic agents destroy the normal tissue architecture thus disrupting cell-to-cell signaling and compromising genomic integrity. Hence, in TOFT the DNA mutations are the effect, and not the cause, of the tissue-level events. Cardinal importance of successful resolution of the TOFT versus SMT controversy dwells in the fact that, according to SMT, cancer is a unidirectional and mostly irreversible disease; whereas, according to TOFT, it is curable and reversible. In this paper, our goal is to outline a plausible scenario in which TOFT and SMT can be reconciled using the framework and concepts of the self-organized criticality (SOC), the principle proven to be extremely fruitful in a wide range of disciplines pertaining to natural phenomena, to biological communities, to large-scale social developments, to technological networks, and to many other subjects of research.
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.