Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28835719›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Cancer2017

Unravelling biology and shifting paradigms in cancer with single-cell sequencing.

Timour Baslan, James Hicks

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Cancer, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 246 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
246citing 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

246 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review

186 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

2 authors.

Timour BaslanCancer Biology and Genetics Program, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York 10044, USA, and Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor, New York 11724, USA.
James HicksUniversity of Southern California Dana and David Dornsife College of Letters, Arts, and Sciences, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California 90089, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The fundamental operative unit of a cancer is the genetically and epigenetically innovative single cell. Whether proliferating or quiescent, in the primary tumour mass or disseminated elsewhere, single cells govern the parameters that dictate all facets of the biology of cancer. Thus, single-cell analyses provide the ultimate level of resolution in our quest for a fundamental understanding of this disease. Historically, this quest has been hampered by technological shortcomings. In this Opinion article, we argue that the rapidly evolving field of single-cell sequencing has unshackled the cancer research community of these shortcomings. From furthering an elemental understanding of intra-tumoural genetic heterogeneity and cancer genome evolution to illuminating the governing principles of disease relapse and metastasis, we posit that single-cell sequencing promises to unravel the biology of all facets of this disease.

Indexed as

Single-Cell AnalysisDNA, NeoplasmEarly Detection of CancerGenomeGenomicsHumansNeoplasm MetastasisNeoplasmsNeoplastic Cells, CirculatingPrecancerous ConditionsRisk AssessmentRNA, NeoplasmSequence Analysis, DNASequence Analysis, RNATranscriptomeDNA, NeoplasmRNA, Neoplasm

Identifiers

PMID28835719

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.