ArticleJournal of ovarian research2022
Pro-cancerogenic effects of spontaneous and drug-induced senescence of ovarian cancer cells in vitro and in vivo: a comparative analysis.
Article in Journal of ovarian research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Overcoming Therapy Resistance in Ovarian Cancer: From Molecular Mechanisms to Emerging Therapeutic Strategies.Cancers · 2026Review
- The Bidirectional Role of Cellular Senescence in the Treatment of Ovarian Cancer.Biomedicines · 2026Review
- Subclonal β-catenin/YAP signaling heterogeneity accelerates ovarian cancer metastasis through a senescence-associated secretory phenotype.Cell death & disease · 2026Article
- Review
- Modeling of senescence-related chemoresistance in ovarian cancer using data analysis and patient-derived organoids.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundClinical outcomes of cancer cell senescence are still elusive. Here, we reveal and compare pro-cancerous activity of spontaneously and drug-inducible senescent ovarian cancer cells. Experiments were performed on tumors and tumor-derived primary epithelial ovarian cancer cells (pEOCs) that were obtained from chemotherapy-naïve patients and from patients who received carboplatin (CPT) and paclitaxel (PCT) before cytoreduction.
resultsThe analysis of tumors showed that senescent cancer cells are present in patients from both groups, albeit most frequently and covering a greater area in tissues from chemotherapy-positive women. This in vivo senescence of pEOCs translated to an expression of senescence markers in early-passage cells in vitro. A conditioned medium from senescent pEOCs fueled the cancer progression, including adhesion of non-senescent pEOCs to normal peritoneal cells, and their increased proliferation, migration, invasion, and EMT. Senescent pEOCs' secretome promoted angiogenic activity of vascular endothelium, induced senescence of normal peritoneal cells, reprogrammed their secretome towards hypersecretion of cancer-promoting proteins, and stimulated motility of cancer cells subjected to a mesothelium- and fibroblast-derived medium. The most striking finding was, however, that spontaneously senescent pEOCs supported all the above pro-cancerous effects more efficiently than drug-inducible senescent cells, which was plausibly related to augmented release of several cancer spread mediators by these cells. The prevalence of spontaneously senescent pEOCs was most evident in experiments on mice when they were able, unlike the drug-inducible cells, to promote the development of drug-sensitive i.p. xenografts.
conclusionsOur study shows that spontaneous senescence of pEOCs should be treated as an independent pathogenetic factor of cancer progression.
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.