Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33334014›Full record

ArticleCancers2020

Mechanisms Generating Cancer Genome Complexity: Back to the Future.

Franck Toledo

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancers, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. High-resolution genomic configuration ofTranslational lung cancer research · 2024
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
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

1 author.

Franck ToledoGenetics of Tumor Suppression, Institut Curie, PSL Research University, Sorbonne University, CNRS UMR3244 Dynamics of Genetic Information, 26 rue d'Ulm, CEDEX 05, 75248 Paris, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Understanding the mechanisms underlying cancer genome evolution has been a major goal for decades. A recent study combining live cell imaging and single-cell genome sequencing suggested that interwoven chromosome breakage-fusion-bridge cycles, micronucleation events and chromothripsis episodes drive cancer genome evolution. Here, I discuss the "interphase breakage model," suggested from prior fluorescent in situ hybridization data that led to a similar conclusion. In this model, the rapid genome evolution observed at early stages of gene amplification was proposed to result from the interweaving of an amplification mechanism (breakage-fusion-bridge cycles) and of a deletion mechanism (micronucleation and stitching of DNA fragments retained in the nucleus).

Indexed as

breakage-fusion-bridge cyclescancer genome evolutionchromothripsisgene amplificationmicronucleip53telomeres

Identifiers

PMID33334014
PMCPMC7765419

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.