Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30587589›Full record

ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2019

Toward understanding cancer stem cell heterogeneity in the tumor microenvironment.

Federico Bocci, Larisa Gearhart-Serna, Marcelo Boareto, Mariana Ribeiro, Eshel Ben-Jacob, Gayathri R Devi, Herbert Levine, José Nelson Onuchic, Mohit Kumar Jolly

Open access · bronzeAbstract readVideo-Audio Media
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 175 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
175citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
14.4field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

175 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 311 citations in OpenAlex.

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

115 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

9 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Federico BocciCenter for Theoretical Biological Physics, Rice University, Houston, TX 77005.
Larisa Gearhart-SernaDepartment of Surgery, Division of Surgical Sciences, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC 27710.
Marcelo BoaretoDepartment of Biosystems Science and Engineering, ETH Zurich, 4058 Basel, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-9915-6376
Mariana RibeiroDepartment of Surgery, Division of Surgical Sciences, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC 27710.
Eshel Ben-JacobCenter for Theoretical Biological Physics, Rice University, Houston, TX 77005.
Gayathri R DeviDepartment of Surgery, Division of Surgical Sciences, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC 27710; gayathri.devi@duke.edu herbert.levine@rice.edu jonuchic@rice.edu mkjolly@iisc.ac.in.
Herbert LevineCenter for Theoretical Biological Physics, Rice University, Houston, TX 77005; gayathri.devi@duke.edu herbert.levine@rice.edu jonuchic@rice.edu mkjolly@iisc.ac.in.
José Nelson OnuchicCenter for Theoretical Biological Physics, Rice University, Houston, TX 77005; gayathri.devi@duke.edu herbert.levine@rice.edu jonuchic@rice.edu mkjolly@iisc.ac.in.
Mohit Kumar JollyCenter for Theoretical Biological Physics, Rice University, Houston, TX 77005; gayathri.devi@duke.edu herbert.levine@rice.edu jonuchic@rice.edu mkjolly@iisc.ac.in.
Center for Theoretical Biological Physics · USDuke University · USSIB Swiss Institute of Bioinformatics · CH

Funding

Women's Cancer Research ProgramP30CA014236 · NCI · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI DONNA NIEDZWIECKI · 1985 to 2026
$174.8M
Duke University Program in Environmental HealthT32ES021432 · NIEHS · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI Akhenaton-Andrew Dhafir Jones, Joel Newman Meyer · 2013 to 2026
$4.0M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA014236NIEHS NIH HHS T32 ES021432
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT) and cancer stem cell (CSC) formation are two paramount processes driving tumor progression, therapy resistance, and cancer metastasis. Recent experiments show that cells with varying EMT and CSC phenotypes are spatially segregated in the primary tumor. The underlying mechanisms generating such spatiotemporal dynamics in the tumor microenvironment, however, remain largely unexplored. Here, we show through a mechanism-based dynamical model that the diffusion of EMT-inducing signals such as TGF-β, together with noncell autonomous control of EMT and CSC decision making via the Notch signaling pathway, can explain experimentally observed disparate localization of subsets of CSCs with varying EMT phenotypes in the tumor. Our simulations show that the more mesenchymal CSCs lie at the invasive edge, while the hybrid epithelial/mesenchymal (E/M) CSCs reside in the tumor interior. Further, motivated by the role of Notch-Jagged signaling in mediating EMT and stemness, we investigated the microenvironmental factors that promote Notch-Jagged signaling. We show that many inflammatory cytokines such as IL-6 that can promote Notch-Jagged signaling can (

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsCytokinesEpithelial-Mesenchymal TransitionFemaleGene Knockdown TechniquesHumansNeoplastic Cells, CirculatingNeoplastic Stem CellsPhenotypeReceptors, NotchSignal TransductionTransforming Growth Factor betaTumor MicroenvironmentCytokinesReceptors, NotchTransforming Growth Factor betabreast tumor organoidscancer stem cellsepithelial–mesenchymal transitioninflammationNotch signaling

Identifiers

PMID30587589
PMCPMC6320545
OpenAlexW2953057790

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.