Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30941310›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in oncology2019

Therapeutic Targeting of Cancer Stem Cells: Integrating and Exploiting the Acidic Niche.

Catherine Vander Linden, Cyril Corbet

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in oncology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing 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

39 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Resistance to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancers: a metabolic perspective.Journal of experimental & clinical cancer research : CR · 2025
    Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. CaProtein science : a publication of the Protein Society · 2022
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Cancer Stem Cells: An Ever-Hiding Foe.Experientia supplementum (2012) · 2022
    Article
  20. Review
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.

Catherine Vander LindenPole of Pharmacology and Therapeutics (FATH), Institut de Recherche Expérimentale et Clinique, UCLouvain, Brussels, Belgium.
Cyril CorbetPole of Pharmacology and Therapeutics (FATH), Institut de Recherche Expérimentale et Clinique, UCLouvain, Brussels, Belgium.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cancer stem cells (CSC) or tumor-initiating cells represent a small subpopulation of cells within the tumor bulk that share features with somatic stem cells, such as self-renewal and pluripotency. From a clinical point of view, CSC are thought to be the main drivers of tumor relapse in patients by supporting treatment resistance and dissemination to distant organs. Both genome instability and microenvironment-driven selection support tumor heterogeneity and enable the emergence of resistant cells with stem-like properties, when therapy is applied. Besides hypoxia and nutrient deprivation, acidosis is another selection barrier in the tumor microenvironment (TME) which provides a permissive niche to shape more aggressive and fitter cancer cell phenotypes. This review describes our current knowledge about the influence of the "acidic niche" on the stem-like phenotypic features of cancer cells. In addition, we briefly survey new therapeutic options that may help eradicate CSC by integrating and/or exploiting the acidic niche, and thereby contribute to prevent the occurrence of therapy resistance as well as metastatic dissemination.

Indexed as

acidosiscancer stem celldormancydrug resistancemetabolismmetastasismicroenvironmentniche

Identifiers

PMID30941310
PMCPMC6433943

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.