Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30965282›Full record

ReviewEndocrine-related cancer2019

Systems biology: perspectives on multiscale modeling in research on endocrine-related cancers.

Robert Clarke, John J Tyson, Ming Tan, William T Baumann, Lu Jin, Jianhua Xuan, Yue Wang

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Endocrine-related cancer, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 26% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Programmatic modeling for biological systems.Current opinion in systems biology · 2021
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Robert ClarkeDepartment of Oncology, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, District of Columbia, USA.
John J TysonDepartment of Biological Sciences, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, Virginia, USA.
Ming TanDepartment of Biostatistics, Bioinformatics & Biomathematics, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, District of Columbia, USA.
William T BaumannDepartment of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, Virginia, USA.
Lu JinDepartment of Oncology, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, District of Columbia, USA.
Jianhua XuanDepartment of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Arlington, Virginia, USA.
Yue WangDepartment of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Arlington, Virginia, USA.
Virginia Tech · USGeorgetown University · USGeorgetown University Medical Center · US

Funding

Tissue Culture Shared ResourceP30CA051008 · NCI · GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY · PI Louis M Weiner · 1990 to 2026
$71.5M
Novel Targets in Endocrine ResponsivenessU54CA149147 · NCI · GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY · PI MADHAVAN, SUBHA · 2010 to 2014
$6.9M
Collaborative Research in Integrative Cancer BiologyU01CA184902 · NCI · GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY · PI CLARKE, ROBERT R., WANG, YUE · 2014 to 2018
$2.7M
Optimizing Targeted Breast Cancer Therapy by Mathematical Modeling and Experimental StudiesR01CA201092 · NCI · VIRGINIA POLYTECHNIC INST AND ST UNIV · PI BAUMANN, WILLIAM THOMAS, SHAJAHAN-HAQ, AYESHA N. · 2016 to 2020
$2.0M
Statistical Methods for Multi-Drug CombinationsR01CA164717 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND BALTIMORE · PI TAN, MING TONY · 2012 to 2015
$791k
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA051008NCI NIH HHS R01 CA164717NCI NIH HHS R01 CA201092NCI NIH HHS U01 CA184902NCI NIH HHS U54 CA149147
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Drawing on concepts from experimental biology, computer science, informatics, mathematics and statistics, systems biologists integrate data across diverse platforms and scales of time and space to create computational and mathematical models of the integrative, holistic functions of living systems. Endocrine-related cancers are well suited to study from a systems perspective because of the signaling complexities arising from the roles of growth factors, hormones and their receptors as critical regulators of cancer cell biology and from the interactions among cancer cells, normal cells and signaling molecules in the tumor microenvironment. Moreover, growth factors, hormones and their receptors are often effective targets for therapeutic intervention, such as estrogen biosynthesis, estrogen receptors or HER2 in breast cancer and androgen receptors in prostate cancer. Given the complexity underlying the molecular control networks in these cancers, a simple, intuitive understanding of how endocrine-related cancers respond to therapeutic protocols has proved incomplete and unsatisfactory. Systems biology offers an alternative paradigm for understanding these cancers and their treatment. To correctly interpret the results of systems-based studies requires some knowledge of how in silico models are built, and how they are used to describe a system and to predict the effects of perturbations on system function. In this review, we provide a general perspective on the field of cancer systems biology, and we explore some of the advantages, limitations and pitfalls associated with using predictive multiscale modeling to study endocrine-related cancers.

Indexed as

Biomedical ResearchModels, BiologicalSystems BiologyComputational BiologyComputer SimulationEndocrine Gland NeoplasmsHumansSignal Transductioncomputational biologymathematical biologypredictive modelingsystems biology

Identifiers

PMID30965282
PMCPMC7045974
OpenAlexW2938458337

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.