Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25030952›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Cancer2014

Cancer: pathological nuclear reprogramming?

Colin R Goding, Duanqing Pei, Xin Lu

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Cancer, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 54 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
54citing 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

54 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. The dualistic origin of human tumors.Seminars in cancer biology · 2018
    Review
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

3 authors.

Colin R GodingLudwig Institute for Cancer Research, Nuffield Department of Clinical Medicine, Old Road Campus Research Building, Old Road Campus, University of Oxford, Headington, Oxford OX3 7DQ, UK.
Duanqing PeiSouth China Institute for Stem Cell Biology and Regenerative Medicine, Guangzhou Institutes of Biomedicine and Health, Chinese Academy of Sciences, 510530 China.
Xin LuLudwig Institute for Cancer Research, Nuffield Department of Clinical Medicine, Old Road Campus Research Building, Old Road Campus, University of Oxford, Headington, Oxford OX3 7DQ, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The ability of stem cells to self-renew and generate different lineages during development and organogenesis is a fundamental, tightly controlled, and generally unidirectional process, whereas the 'immortality' of cancer cells could be regarded as pathological self-renewal. The molecular mechanisms that underpin the generation of induced pluripotent stem cells are remarkably similar to those that are deregulated in cancer - so much so that aberrant reprogramming is tumorigenic. The similarities also suggest that mutations in genes implicated in DNA methylation dynamics might represent a hallmark of cancers with a stem cell origin, and they highlight an alternative view of cancer that may be of clinical benefit.

Indexed as

Cellular ReprogrammingAnimalsCell Transformation, NeoplasticDNA (Cytosine-5-)-MethyltransferasesEpigenesis, GeneticHumansIsocitrate DehydrogenaseNeoplasmsProto-Oncogene ProteinsTumor MicroenvironmentDNA (Cytosine-5-)-MethyltransferasesIsocitrate DehydrogenaseProto-Oncogene Proteins

Identifiers

PMID25030952

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.