ReviewEuropean journal of epidemiology2019
Stem cell replication, somatic mutations and role of randomness in the development of cancer.
Review in European journal of epidemiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.
- [Mechanistic research progress on radiotherapy resistance of cancer stem cells].Zhong nan da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Central South University. Medical sciences · 2025Review
- Impact of pan-cancer analysis of the exportins family on prognosis, the tumor microenvironment and its potential therapeutic efficacy.Clinical and experimental medicine · 2024Article
- Familial CCM Genes Might Not Be Main Drivers for Pathogenesis of Sporadic CCMs-Genetic Similarity between Cancers and Vascular Malformations.Journal of personalized medicine · 2023Review
- The role of chance in cancer causation.La Medicina del lavoro · 2022Article
- Quantifying substantial carcinogenesis of genetic and environmental factors from measurement error in the number of stem cell divisions.BMC cancer · 2022Article
- Cutaneous malignant melanoma incidence is strongly associated with European depigmented skin type regardless of ambient ultraviolet radiation levels: evidence from Worldwide population-based data.AIMS public health · 2022Article
- Identification of DNA repair-related genes predicting pathogenesis and prognosis for liver cancer.Cancer cell international · 2021Article
- Objectives, design and main findings until 2020 from the Rotterdam Study.European journal of epidemiology · 2020Article
- Commonly used estimates of the genetic contribution to disease are subject to the same fallacies as bad luck estimates.European journal of epidemiology · 2019Review
- Computational tools to detect signatures of mutational processes in DNA from tumours: A review and empirical comparison of performance.PloS one · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
8 authors at 5 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
Abstract
An intense scientific debate has recently taken place relating to the "bad luck" hypothesis in cancer development, namely that intrinsic random, and therefore unavoidable, mutagenic events would have a predominant role in tumorigenesis. In this article we review the main contributions to this debate and explain the reasons why the claim that cancer is mostly explained by intrinsic random factors is unsupported by data and theoretical models. In support of this, we present an analysis showing that smoking-induced mutations are more predictive of cancer risk than the lifetime number of stem cell cellular divisions.
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.