ArticleLeukemia2020
Is cancer latency an outdated concept? Lessons from chronic myeloid leukemia.
Article in Leukemia, 2020. 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, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- A new cancer progression model: From synthetic tumors to real data and back.PLoS computational biology · 2026Article
- The fragile equilibrium of cancer latency: lessons from spontaneous remission in congenital leukemia.Leukemia · 2026Article
- Review
- Article
- Trp53 Deletion Promotes Exacerbated Colitis, Facilitates Lgr5+ Cancer Stem Cell Expansion, and Fuels Tumorigenesis in AOM/DSS-Induced Colorectal Cancer.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Article
- Higher prevalence of harbouring BCR::ABL1 in first-degree relatives of chronic myeloid leukaemia (CML) patients compared to normal population.BMC cancer · 2024Article
- Cell Phone Radiation Exposure Limits and Engineering Solutions.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Review
- Article
- Definition, Epidemiology, Pathophysiology, and Essential Criteria for Diagnosis of Pediatric Chronic Myeloid Leukemia.Cancers · 2021Review
- CD44 and Tumor-Derived Extracellular Vesicles (TEVs). Possible Gateway to Cancer Metastasis.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Our concept of cancer latency, the interval from when a cancer starts until it is diagnosed, has changed dramatically. A prior widely-used definition was the interval between an exposure to a cancer-causing substance and cancer diagnosis. However, this definition does not accurately reflect current knowledge of how most cancers develop assuming, mostly incorrectly, one exposure is the sole cause of a cancer, ignoring the possibility the cancer being considered would have developed anyway but that the exposure accelerated cancer development and eliding the randomness in when a cancer is diagnosed. We show, using chronic myeloid leukaemia as a model, that defining cancer latency is not as simple as it once seemed. It is difficult or impossible to know at which event or mutation to start to clock to measure cancer latency. It is equally difficult to know when to stop the clock given the stochastic nature of when cancers are diagnosed. Importantly, even in genetically-identical twins with the same driver mutation intervals to develop cancer vary substantially. And we discuss other confonders. Clearly we need a new definition of cancer latency or we need to abandon the concept of cancer latency in the modern era of cancer biology.
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.