ArticleMolecular oncology2018
Haploid genetic screens identify genetic vulnerabilities to microtubule-targeting agents.
Article in Molecular oncology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.
- The oncogenome of the domestic cat.Science (New York, N.Y.) · 2026Article
- Docetaxel response in BRCA1,p53-deficient mammary tumor cells is affected by Huntingtin and BAP1.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024Article
- In vitro evolution and whole genome analysis to study chemotherapy drug resistance in haploid human cells.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Considerations and practical implications of performing a phenotypic CRISPR/Cas survival screen.PloS one · 2022Article
- Review
- Genome-scale CRISPR screening at high sensitivity with an empirically designed sgRNA library.BMC biology · 2020Article
- Establishment of an eHAP1 human haploid cell line hybrid reference genome assembled from short and long reads.Genomics · 2020Article
- Uptake and subcellular distribution of radiolabeled polymersomes for radiotherapy.Nanotheranostics · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The absence of biomarkers to accurately predict anticancer therapy response remains a major obstacle in clinical oncology. We applied a genome-wide loss-of-function screening approach in human haploid cells to characterize genetic vulnerabilities to classical microtubule-targeting agents. Using docetaxel and vinorelbine, two well-established chemotherapeutic agents, we sought to identify genetic alterations sensitizing human HAP1 cells to these drugs. Despite the fact that both drugs act on microtubules, a set of distinct genes were identified whose disruption affects drug sensitivity. For docetaxel, this included a number of genes with a function in mitosis, while for vinorelbine we identified inactivation of FBXW7, RB1, and NF2, three frequently mutated tumor suppressor genes, as sensitizing factors. We validated these genes using independent knockout clones and confirmed FBXW7 as an important regulator of the mitotic spindle assembly. Upon FBXW7 depletion, vinorelbine treatment led to decreased survival of cells due to defective mitotic progression and subsequent mitotic catastrophe. We show that haploid insertional mutagenesis screens are a useful tool to study genetic vulnerabilities to classical chemotherapeutic drugs by identifying thus far unknown sensitivity factors. These results provide a rationale for investigating patient response to vinca alkaloid-based anticancer treatment in relation to the mutational status of these three tumor suppressor genes, and could in the future lead to the establishment of novel predictive biomarkers or suggest new drug combinations based on molecular mechanisms of drug sensitivity.
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.