ReviewCell cycle (Georgetown, Tex.)2016
Reprogramming strategies for the establishment of novel human cancer models.
Review in Cell cycle (Georgetown, Tex.), 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Indium-111-labeled CD166-targeted peptide as a potential nuclear imaging agent for detecting colorectal cancer stem-like cells in a xenograft mouse model.EJNMMI research · 2020Article
- Soft Tissue Sarcoma Cancer Stem Cells: An Overview.Frontiers in oncology · 2018Review
- Spermatogonial stem cells and progenitors are refractory to reprogramming to pluripotency by the transcription factors Oct3/4, c-Myc, Sox2 and Klf4.Oncotarget · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cancer comprises heterogeneous cells, ranging from highly proliferative immature precursors to more differentiated cell lineages. The emergence of the "cancer stem cell" (CSC) hypothesis that they are the cells responsible for resistance, metastasis and secondary tumor appearance identifies these populations as novel obligatory targets for the treatment of cancer. CSCs, like their normal tissue-specific stem cell counterparts, are multipotent, partially differentiated, self-sustaining, yet transformed cells. To date, most studies on CSC biology have relied on the use of murine models and primary human material. In spite of much progress, the use of primary material presents several limitations that limit our understanding of the mechanisms underlying CSC formation, the similarities between normal stem cells and CSCs and ultimately, the possibility for developing targeted therapies. Recently, different strategies for controlling cell fate have been applied to the modeling of human cancer initiation and for the generation of human CSC models. Here we will summarize recent developments in the establishment and application of reprogramming strategies for the modeling of human cancer initiation and CSC formation.
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.