Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32358524›Full record

ArticleNature communications2020

Context specificity of the EMT transcriptional response.

David P Cook, Barbara C Vanderhyden

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nature communications, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 167 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
167citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

167 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

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

107 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

2 authors.

David P CookCancer Therapeutics Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, ON, Canada. david.cook@uottawa.ca.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7639-6724
Barbara C VanderhydenCancer Therapeutics Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, ON, Canada. bvanderhyden@ohri.ca.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7644-7189

Funding

CIHR
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Epithelial-mesenchymal plasticity contributes to many biological processes, including tumor progression. Various epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT) responses have been reported and no common, EMT-defining gene expression program has been identified. Here, we have performed a comparative analysis of the EMT response, leveraging highly multiplexed single-cell RNA sequencing (scRNA-seq) to measure expression profiles of 103,999 cells from 960 samples, comprising 12 EMT time course experiments and independent kinase inhibitor screens for each. We demonstrate that the EMT is vastly context specific, with an average of only 22% of response genes being shared between any two conditions, and over half of all response genes were restricted to 1-2 time course experiments. Further, kinase inhibitor screens revealed signaling dependencies and modularity of these responses. These findings suggest that the EMT is not simply a single, linear process, but is highly variable and modular, warranting quantitative frameworks for understanding nuances of the transition.

Indexed as

A549 CellsEpithelial CellsEpithelial-Mesenchymal TransitionGene Expression Regulation, NeoplasticHumansMCF-7 CellsSequence Analysis, RNASignal Transduction

Identifiers

PMID32358524
PMCPMC7195456

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.