Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27820796›Full record

ArticleNature chemical biology2017

Genome-wide genetic screening with chemically mutagenized haploid embryonic stem cells.

Josep V Forment, Mareike Herzog, Julia Coates, Tomasz Konopka, Bianca V Gapp, Sebastian M Nijman, David J Adams, Thomas M Keane, Stephen P Jackson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nature chemical biology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing 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

28 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Applications ofStem cells international · 2021
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. The milestone of genetic screening: Mammalian haploid cells.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2020
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Mammalian haploid stem cells: establishment, engineering and applications.Cellular and molecular life sciences : CMLS · 2019
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

9 authors.

Josep V FormentThe Wellcome Trust and Cancer Research UK Gurdon Institute, and Department of Biochemistry, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7797-2583
Mareike HerzogThe Wellcome Trust and Cancer Research UK Gurdon Institute, and Department of Biochemistry, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9747-2327
Julia CoatesThe Wellcome Trust and Cancer Research UK Gurdon Institute, and Department of Biochemistry, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Tomasz KonopkaLudwig Institute for Cancer Research Ltd. and Target Discovery Institute, Nuffield Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Bianca V GappLudwig Institute for Cancer Research Ltd. and Target Discovery Institute, Nuffield Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Sebastian M NijmanLudwig Institute for Cancer Research Ltd. and Target Discovery Institute, Nuffield Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
David J AdamsThe Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute, Hinxton, Cambridge, UK.
Thomas M KeaneThe Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute, Hinxton, Cambridge, UK.
Stephen P JacksonThe Wellcome Trust and Cancer Research UK Gurdon Institute, and Department of Biochemistry, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9317-7937

Funding

Cancer Research UK 11224Cancer Research UK 13031Cancer Research UK 18796Cancer Research UK 21717Cancer Research UK A11224European Research Council 311166Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In model organisms, classical genetic screening via random mutagenesis provides key insights into the molecular bases of genetic interactions, helping to define synthetic lethality, synthetic viability and drug-resistance mechanisms. The limited genetic tractability of diploid mammalian cells, however, precludes this approach. Here, we demonstrate the feasibility of classical genetic screening in mammalian systems by using haploid cells, chemical mutagenesis and next-generation sequencing, providing a new tool to explore mammalian genetic interactions.

Indexed as

Genetic TestingAnimalsCell LineGenomeMiceMouse Embryonic Stem CellsMutagenesis

Identifiers

PMID27820796
PMCPMC5164930

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.