Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32983567›Full record

ReviewFuture science OA2020

From cancer to rejuvenation: incomplete regeneration as the missing link (part II: rejuvenation circle).

Mamuka G Baramiya, Eugene Baranov, Irina Saburina, Lev Salnikov

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Future science OA, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. 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

4 authors.

Mamuka G BaramiyaAntiCancer, Inc., San Diego, CA 92111, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6946-4282
Eugene BaranovAntiCancer, Inc., San Diego, CA 92111, USA.
Irina SaburinaInstitute of General Pathology & Pathophysiology, Moscow, Russia.
Lev SalnikovDepartment of Computer Science, Metropolitan College, Boston University, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In the first part of our study, we substantiated that the embryonic reontogenesis and malignant growth (disintegrating growth) pathways are the same, but occur at different stages of ontogenesis, this mechanism is carried out in opposite directions. Cancer has been shown to be epigenetic-blocked redifferentiation and unfinished somatic embryogenesis. We formulated that only this approach of aging elimination has real prospects for a future that is fraught with cancer, as we will be able to convert this risk into a rejuvenation process through the continuous cycling of cell dedifferentiation-differentiation processes (permanent remorphogenesis). Here, we continue to develop the idea of looped ontogenesis and formulate the concept of the rejuvenation circle.

Indexed as

agingcarcinogenesisepigeneticimmunological toleranceimmunoprivileged siteslooped ontogenesisrejuvenationremorphogenesisreontogenesissenescence

Identifiers

PMID32983567
PMCPMC7491027

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.