ArticleCancer research2016
Commentary on Almassalha et al., "The Greater Genomic Landscape: The Heterogeneous Evolution of Cancer".
Article in Cancer research, 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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Macrogenomic engineering via modulation of the scaling of chromatin packing density.Nature biomedical engineering · 2017Article
- The Global Relationship between Chromatin Physical Topology, Fractal Structure, and Gene Expression.Scientific reports · 2017Article
- The genetics and molecular biology of colonic neoplasia: practical implications for the clinician.Current opinion in gastroenterology · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
- Comment on
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this issue of Cancer Research, Almassalha and colleagues have proposed a new concept of the development of malignancy, that of the greater genomic landscape. They propose a stressor-related exploration of intracellular genomic sites as a response mechanism. This process can express sites with beneficial or deleterious effects, among them those that promote cell proliferation. They point out that their conception is broader, although certainly inclusive, of the process of gene induction. The authors view the physical process of chromatin reorganization as central to the exploration of the genomic landscape. Accordingly, they advocate the development of agents to limit chromatin structural modification as a chemotherapeutic approach in cancer. We found their theory relevant to understand the phenotypic heterogeneity of malignancy, particularly in familial cancer syndromes. For example, the familial atypical multiple mole melanoma (FAMMM) syndrome, related to a gene mutation, is characterized by a diversity of melanocytic lesions, only some of which become malignant melanoma. This new conceptualization can do much to increase understanding of the diversity of malignancy in families with hereditary cancer. Cancer Res; 76(19); 5602-4. ©2016 AACR.
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.