Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28489927›Full record

ArticlePloS one2017

Protein degradation rate is the dominant mechanism accounting for the differences in protein abundance of basal p53 in a human breast and colorectal cancer cell line.

Eszter Lakatos, Ali Salehi-Reyhani, Michael Barclay, Michael P H Stumpf, David R Klug

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. miRNA modules for precise, tunable control of gene expression.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025
    Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. 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

5 authors.

Eszter LakatosDepartment of Life Sciences, Centre for Integrative Systems Biology and Bioinformatics, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.
Ali Salehi-ReyhaniDepartment of Chemistry, Institute of Chemical Biology, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1084-2012
Michael BarclayDepartment of Chemistry, Institute of Chemical Biology, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.
Michael P H StumpfDepartment of Life Sciences, Centre for Integrative Systems Biology and Bioinformatics, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.
David R KlugDepartment of Chemistry, Institute of Chemical Biology, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We determine p53 protein abundances and cell to cell variation in two human cancer cell lines with single cell resolution, and show that the fractional width of the distributions is the same in both cases despite a large difference in average protein copy number. We developed a computational framework to identify dominant mechanisms controlling the variation of protein abundance in a simple model of gene expression from the summary statistics of single cell steady state protein expression distributions. Our results, based on single cell data analysed in a Bayesian framework, lends strong support to a model in which variation in the basal p53 protein abundance may be best explained by variations in the rate of p53 protein degradation. This is supported by measurements of the relative average levels of mRNA which are very similar despite large variation in the level of protein.

Indexed as

BreastBreast NeoplasmsCell Line, TumorColorectal NeoplasmsFemaleGene Expression Regulation, NeoplasticHumansProteolysisRNA, MessengerTranscription, GeneticTumor Suppressor Protein p53RNA, MessengerTumor Suppressor Protein p53

Identifiers

PMID28489927
PMCPMC5425217

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.