Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31644944›Full record

ReviewSeminars in cancer biology2020

The role of cell signaling in the crosstalk between autophagy and apoptosis in the regulation of tumor cell survival in response to sorafenib and neratinib.

Laurence A Booth, Jane L Roberts, Paul Dent

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Seminars in cancer biology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 47 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
47citing papers in PubMed
6.1field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

47 citing papers in PubMed, 80 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Blockage of Autophagy for Cancer Therapy: A Comprehensive Review.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024
    Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Unveiling the mechanisms and challenges of cancer drug resistance.Cell communication and signaling : CCS · 2024
    Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article
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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Laurence A BoothDepartment of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Virginia Commonwealth University, 401 College St, Richmond, VA 23298, United States.
Jane L RobertsDepartment of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Virginia Commonwealth University, 401 College St, Richmond, VA 23298, United States.
Paul DentDepartment of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Virginia Commonwealth University, 401 College St, Richmond, VA 23298, United States. Electronic address: paul.dent@vcuhealth.org.
Virginia Commonwealth University · US

Funding

Pemetrexed and sildenafil for lung cancerR01CA192613 · NCI · VIRGINIA COMMONWEALTH UNIVERSITY · PI DENT, PAUL · 2015 to 2019
$1.6M
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA192613
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The molecular mechanisms by which tumor cells survive or die following therapeutic interventions are complex. There are three broadly defined categories of cell death processes: apoptosis (Type I), autophagic cell death (Type II), and necrosis (Type III). In hematopoietic tumor cells, the majority of toxic stimuli cause these cells to undergo a death process called apoptosis; apoptosis specifically involves the cleavage of DNA into large defined pieces and their subsequent localization in vesicles. Thus, 'pure' apoptosis largely lacks inflammatory potential. In carcinomas, however, the mechanisms by which tumor cells ultimately die are considerably more complex. Although the machinery of apoptosis is engaged by toxic stimuli, other processes such as autophagy ("self-eating") and replicative cell death can lead to observations that do not simplistically correspond to any of the individual Type I-III formalized death categories. The 'hybrid' forms of cell death observed in carcinoma cells result in cellular materials being released into the extracellular space without packaging, which promotes inflammation, potentially leading to the accelerated re-growth of surviving tumor cells by macrophages. Drugs as single agents or in combinations can simultaneously initiate signaling via both apoptotic and autophagic pathways. Based on the tumor type and its oncogene drivers, as well as the drug(s) being used and the duration and intensity of the autophagosome signal, apoptosis and autophagy have the potential to act in concert to kill or alternatively that the actions of either pathway can act to suppress signaling by the other pathway. And, there also is evidence that autophagic flux, by causing lysosomal protease activation, with their subsequent release into the cytosol, can directly mediate killing. This review will discuss the interactive biology between apoptosis and autophagy in carcinoma cells. Finally, the molecular actions of the FDA-approved drugs neratinib and sorafenib, and how they enhance both apoptotic and toxic autophagic processes, alone or in combination with other agents, is discussed in a bench-to-bedside manner.

Indexed as

AnimalsApoptosisAutophagyCell SurvivalHumansNeoplasmsQuinolinesSignal TransductionSorafenibneratinibQuinolinesSorafenibApoptosisAutophagyChaperoneDrugEndoplasmic reticulumERKHistone deacetylaseKinaseMAP kinaseNeratinibOff-target effectPazopanibPemetrexedReceptor tyrosine kinaseSorafenibSurvival signaling

Identifiers

PMID31644944
PMCPMC7167338
OpenAlexW2981184261

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.