ArticleCancers2021
Evaluating the Epithelial-Mesenchymal Program in Human Breast Epithelial Cells Cultured in Soft Agar Using a Novel Macromolecule Extraction Protocol.
Article in Cancers, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Targeting HER2-positive breast cancer cells by a combination of dasatinib and BMS-202: Insight into the molecular pathways.Cancer cell international · 2024Article
- Domain-specific p53 mutants activate EGFR by distinct mechanisms exposing tissue-independent therapeutic vulnerabilities.Nature communications · 2023Article
- Article
- RAB4A GTPase regulates epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition by modulating RAC1 activation.Breast cancer research : BCR · 2022Article
- Suppression of isoprenylcysteine carboxylmethyltransferase compromises DNA damage repair.Life science alliance · 2021Article
- From the Matrix to the Nucleus and Back: Mechanobiology in the Light of Health, Pathologies, and Regeneration of Oral Periodontal Tissues.Biomolecules · 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
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The ability to grow in anchorage-independent conditions is an important feature of malignant cells, and it is well-established that cellular phenotypes in adherent cultures can differ widely from phenotypes observed in xenografts and anchorage-independent conditions. The anchorage-independent soft-agar colony formation assay has been widely used as a bridge between adherent cell cultures and animal tumor studies, providing a reliable in vitro tool to predict the tumorigenicity of cancer cells. However, this functional assay is limited in its utility for molecular mechanistic studies, as currently there is no reliable method that allows the extraction of biological macromolecules from cells embedded in soft-agar matrices, especially in experimental conditions where no visible colonies form. We developed a set of new methods that enable the extraction of DNA, RNA and proteins directly from cells embedded in soft agar, allowing for a wide range of molecular signaling analysis. Using the new methods and human mammary epithelial cells (HMECs), we studied the role of epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT) in the ability of HMECs to form colonies in soft agar. We found that, when cultured in soft agar instead of in adherent cultures, immortalized non-malignant HME-hTERT cells upregulated the epithelial program, which was noted to be necessary for their survival in this anchorage-independent condition. Overexpression of SV40 small T antigen (ST) or the EMT master-regulator SNAI1 negates this requirement and significantly enhances colony formation in soft agar driven by mutant-RAS. Interestingly, we found that, similar to SNAI1, ST also promotes EMT changes in HMECs, providing further support for EMT as a prerequisite for the efficient anchorage-independent colony formation driven by mutant-RAS in our HMEC model.
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.