Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35625590›Full record

ArticleBiomolecules2022

Paradoxical Behavior of Oncogenes Undermines the Somatic Mutation Theory.

Noemi Monti, Roberto Verna, Aurora Piombarolo, Alessandro Querqui, Mariano Bizzarri, Valeria Fedeli

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Biomolecules, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Cancer research and the mainstream of biology.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2025
    Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. 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

6 authors.

Noemi MontiSystems Biology Group Lab, Department of Experimental Medicine, "Sapienza" University of Rome, Viale Regina Elena 324, 00161 Rome, Italy.
Roberto VernaSystems Biology Group Lab, Department of Experimental Medicine, "Sapienza" University of Rome, Viale Regina Elena 324, 00161 Rome, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-1869-3912
Aurora PiombaroloSystems Biology Group Lab, Department of Experimental Medicine, "Sapienza" University of Rome, Viale Regina Elena 324, 00161 Rome, Italy.
Alessandro QuerquiSystems Biology Group Lab, Department of Experimental Medicine, "Sapienza" University of Rome, Viale Regina Elena 324, 00161 Rome, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-0078-2201
Mariano BizzarriSystems Biology Group Lab, Department of Experimental Medicine, "Sapienza" University of Rome, Viale Regina Elena 324, 00161 Rome, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-0408-4136
Valeria FedeliSystems Biology Group Lab, Department of Experimental Medicine, "Sapienza" University of Rome, Viale Regina Elena 324, 00161 Rome, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The currently accepted theory on the influence of DNA mutations on carcinogenesis (the Somatic Mutation Theory, SMT) is facing an increasing number of controversial results that undermine the explanatory power of mutated genes considered as "causative" factors. Intriguing results have demonstrated that several critical genes may act differently, as oncogenes or tumor suppressors, while phenotypic reversion of cancerous cells/tissues can be achieved by modifying the microenvironment, the mutations they are carrying notwithstanding. Furthermore, a high burden of mutations has been identified in many non-cancerous tissues without any apparent pathological consequence. All things considered, a relevant body of unexplained inconsistencies calls for an in depth rewiring of our theoretical models. Ignoring these paradoxes is no longer sustainable. By avoiding these conundrums, the scientific community will deprive itself of the opportunity to achieve real progress in this important biomedical field. To remedy this situation, we need to embrace new theoretical perspectives, taking the cell-microenvironment interplay as the privileged pathogenetic level of observation, and by assuming new explanatory models based on truly different premises. New theoretical frameworks dawned in the last two decades principally focus on the complex interaction between cells and their microenvironment, which is thought to be the critical level from which carcinogenesis arises. Indeed, both molecular and biophysical components of the stroma can dramatically drive cell fate commitment and cell outcome in opposite directions, even in the presence of the same stimulus. Therefore, such a novel approach can help in solving apparently inextricable paradoxes that are increasingly observed in cancer biology.

Indexed as

NeoplasmsCarcinogenesisDNAHumansMutationOncogenesTumor MicroenvironmentDNAcancer reversionparadoxesSMTsystems biologyTOFTtumor microenvironment

Identifiers

PMID35625590
PMCPMC9138429

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.