ReviewBMC cancer2015
The crossroads between cancer stem cells and aging.
Review in BMC cancer, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Investigating the Role of Peroxisomes in Regulating Breast Cancer Stem Cell Mechanisms.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
- The molecular features of lung cancer stem cells in dedifferentiation process-driven epigenetic alterations.The Journal of biological chemistry · 2024Review
- The Role of SOX Transcription Factors in Ageing and Age-Related Diseases.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
- Evaluation of the Cytotoxicity of Cationic Polymers on Glioblastoma Cancer Stem Cells.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2022Article
- Breaking the aging epigenetic barrier.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2022Review
- Aging, stem cells and cancer updated.Aging · 2021Article
- Review
- Aging-related markers in rat urine revealed by dynamic metabolic profiling using machine learning.Aging · 2021Article
- Pathways of aging: comparative analysis of gene signatures in replicative senescence and stress induced premature senescence.BMC genomics · 2016Article
- In vitro models of cancer stem cells and clinical applications.BMC cancer · 2016Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The cancer stem cell (CSC) hypothesis suggests that only a subpopulation of cells within a tumour is responsible for the initiation and progression of neoplasia. The original and best evidence for the existence of CSCs came from advances in the field of haematological malignancies. Thus far, putative CSCs have been isolated from various solid and non-solid tumours and shown to possess self-renewal, differentiation, and cancer regeneration properties. Although research in the field is progressing extremely fast, proof of concept for the CSC hypothesis is still lacking and key questions remain unanswered, e.g. the cell of origin for these cells. Nevertheless, it is undisputed that neoplastic transformation is associated with genetic and epigenetic alterations of normal cells, and a better understanding of these complex processes is of utmost importance for developing new anti-cancer therapies. In the present review, we discuss the CSC hypothesis with special emphasis on age-associated alterations that govern carcinogenesis, at least in some types of tumours. We present evidence from the scientific literature for age-related genetic and epigenetic alterations leading to cancer and discuss the main challenges in the field.
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.