ReviewJournal of molecular biology2015
Studying Cellular Signal Transduction with OMIC Technologies.
Review in Journal of molecular biology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Analyzing signaling activity and function in hematopoietic cells.The Journal of experimental medicine · 2021Review
- Exploiting Synthetic Lethality and Network Biology to Overcome EGFR Inhibitor Resistance in Lung Cancer.Journal of molecular biology · 2017Review
- Integrated Strategies to Gain a Systems-Level View of Dynamic Signaling Networks.Methods in enzymology · 2017Article
- Molecular crossroads: identifying MAPK proteins bridging SMAD and dopamine pathways in breast cancer.Cell cycle (Georgetown, Tex.)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In the gulf between genotype and phenotype exists proteins and, in particular, protein signal transduction systems. These systems use a relatively limited parts list to respond to a much longer list of extracellular, environmental, and/or mechanical cues with rapidity and specificity. Most signaling networks function in a highly non-linear and often contextual manner. Furthermore, these processes occur dynamically across space and time. Because of these complexities, systems and "OMIC" approaches are essential for the study of signal transduction. One challenge in using OMIC-scale approaches to study signaling is that the "signal" can take different forms in different situations. Signals are encoded in diverse ways such as protein-protein interactions, enzyme activities, localizations, or post-translational modifications to proteins. Furthermore, in some cases, signals may be encoded only in the dynamics, duration, or rates of change of these features. Accordingly, systems-level analyses of signaling may need to integrate multiple experimental and/or computational approaches. As the field has progressed, the non-triviality of integrating experimental and computational analyses has become apparent. Successful use of OMIC methods to study signaling will require the "right" experiments and the "right" modeling approaches, and it is critical to consider both in the design phase of the project. In this review, we discuss common OMIC and modeling approaches for studying signaling, emphasizing the philosophical and practical considerations for effectively merging these two types of approaches to maximize the probability of obtaining reliable and novel insights into signaling biology.
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.