Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33202731›Full record

ReviewCancers2020

Not All Wnt Activation Is Equal: Ligand-Dependent versus Ligand-Independent Wnt Activation in Colorectal Cancer.

Sam O Kleeman, Simon J Leedham

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Cancers, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

29 citing papers in PubMed, 47 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Advances in Mapping Tumor Progression from Precancer Atlases.Cancer prevention research (Philadelphia, Pa.) · 2023
    Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  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

2 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.

Sam O KleemanCold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor, NY 11724, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-1720-8804
Simon J LeedhamIntestinal Stem Cell Biology Lab, Wellcome Trust Centre Human Genetics, University of Oxford, Oxford OX3 7BN, UK.
Centre for Human Genetics · GB

Funding

Wellcome Trust 206314/Z/17/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Wnt signaling is ubiquitously activated in colorectal tumors and driver mutations are identified in genes such as APC, CTNNB1, RNF43 and R-spondin (RSPO2/3). Adenomatous polyposis coli (APC) and CTNNB1 mutations lead to downstream constitutive activation (ligand-independent), while RNF43 and RSPO mutations require exogenous Wnt ligand to activate signaling (ligand-dependent). Here, we present evidence that these mutations are not equivalent and that ligand-dependent and ligand-independent tumors differ in terms of underlying Wnt biology, molecular pathogenesis, morphology and prognosis. These non-overlapping characteristics can be harnessed to develop biomarkers and targeted treatments for ligand-dependent tumors, including porcupine inhibitors, anti-RSPO3 antibodies and asparaginase. There is emerging evidence that these therapies may synergize with immunotherapy in ligand-dependent tumors. In summary, we propose that ligand-dependent tumors are an underappreciated separate disease entity in colorectal cancer.

Indexed as

cancercolorectalimmunotherapyporcupineR-spondinserratedsignalingWnt

Identifiers

PMID33202731
PMCPMC7697568
OpenAlexW3100750497

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.