Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34359573›Full record

ReviewCancers2021

Anastasis: Return Journey from Cell Death.

Victoria Zaitceva, Gelina S Kopeina, Boris Zhivotovsky

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cancers, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed
2.2field-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

27 citing papers in PubMed, 34 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Anastasis: an unwelcome guest in cancer therapy.Apoptosis : an international journal on programmed cell death · 2026
    Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Anastasis: Reality or Fiction?Bulletin of experimental biology and medicine · 2025
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Chromothripsis.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2025
    Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Spatial-Temporal Genome Regulation in Stress-Response and Cell-Fate Change.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023
    Review
  17. Article
  18. DNA fragility at theOpen biology · 2023
    Review
  19. Review
  20. 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

3 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.

Victoria ZaitcevaFaculty of Medicine, MV Lomonosov Moscow State University, 119991 Moscow, Russia.
Gelina S KopeinaFaculty of Medicine, MV Lomonosov Moscow State University, 119991 Moscow, Russia.
Boris ZhivotovskyFaculty of Medicine, MV Lomonosov Moscow State University, 119991 Moscow, Russia.ORCID 0000-0002-2238-3482
Lomonosov Moscow State University · RU

Funding

Cancerfonden 190345Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Russian Federation 075-15-2020-789Radiumhemmets Forskningsfonder 181301Russian Foundation of Basic Research 18-29-09005Russian Science Foundation 19-15-00125
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

For over 20 years, it has been a dogma that once the integrity of mitochondria is disrupted and proapoptotic proteins that are normally located in the intermembrane space of mitochondria appeared in the cytoplasm, the process of cell death becomes inevitable. However, it has been recently shown that upon removal of the death signal, even at the stage of disturbance in the mitochondria, cells can recover and continue to grow. This phenomenon was named anastasis. Here, we will critically discuss the present knowledge concerning the mechanisms of cell death reversal, or development of anastasis, methods for its detection, and what role signaling from different intracellular compartments plays in anastasis stimulation.

Indexed as

anastasisapoptosismitochondriastresssurvival

Identifiers

PMID34359573
PMCPMC8345212
OpenAlexW3186540337

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.