Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35983233›Full record

ReviewComputational and structural biotechnology journal2022

Breast cancer metastasis: Is it a matter of OMICS and proper ex-vivo models?

Mario Cioce, Andrea Sacconi, Sara Donzelli, Claudia Bonomo, Letizia Perracchio, Mariantonia Carosi, Stefano Telera, Vito Michele Fazio, Claudio Botti, Sabrina Strano and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Computational and structural biotechnology journal, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 30% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Organ-Specificity of Breast Cancer Metastasis.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023
    Review
  2. The new world of RNA diagnostics and therapeutics.Journal of experimental & clinical cancer research : CR · 2023
    Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Mario CioceLaboratory of Molecular Medicine and Biotechnology, University Campus Bio-Medico of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Andrea SacconiClinical Trial Center, Biostatistics and Bioinformatics Unit, IRCCS Regina Elena National Cancer Institute, Rome, Italy.
Sara DonzelliTranslational Oncology Research Unit, IRCCS Regina Elena National Cancer Institute, Rome, Italy.
Claudia BonomoDepartment of Pathology, IRCCS Regina Elena National Cancer Institute, Rome, Italy.
Letizia PerracchioDepartment of Pathology, IRCCS Regina Elena National Cancer Institute, Rome, Italy.
Mariantonia CarosiDepartment of Pathology, IRCCS Regina Elena National Cancer Institute, Rome, Italy.
Stefano TeleraNeurosurgery Unit, IRCCS Regina Elena National Cancer Institute, Rome, Italy.
Vito Michele FazioLaboratory of Molecular Medicine and Biotechnology, University Campus Bio-Medico of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Claudio BottiBreast Surgery Unit, IRCCS Regina Elena National Cancer Institute, Rome, Italy.
Sabrina StranoSAFU Unit, IRCCS Regina Elena National Cancer Institute, Rome, Italy.
Giovanni BlandinoTranslational Oncology Research Unit, IRCCS Regina Elena National Cancer Institute, Rome, Italy.
Istituti di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico · ITUniversità Campus Bio-Medico · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Genomics has greatly increased the understanding of the study of breast cancer (BC) and has shaped the concept of intra-tumor heterogeneity, currently recognized as a propelling force for cancer progression. In this context, knowledge and understanding of metastatic breast cancer (mBC) has somehow lagged behind that of primary breast cancer. This may be explained by the relative scarcity of matched mBC samples, however it is possible that the mutation spectrum obtained from primary BC does not capture the full complexity of the metastatic disease. Here, we provide a few examples supporting this possibility, from public databases. We evoke the need to perform an integrated multi-OMICS characterization of mBC, to obtain a broad understanding of this complex disease, whose evolution cannot be explained solely by genomics. Pertinent to this, we suggest that rather an infrequent use of Patient-Derived -Tumor-Organoids (PDTOs) may be influenced by assuming that the metastatic conditions of PDTOs growth (mPDTOs) should be similar to those of the tissue of origin. We challenge this view by suggesting that the use of "target-organ inspired" growth conditions for mPDTOs, may better fit the emerging knowledge of metastatic disease. Thus, the integrated use of multi-OMICS and of clinically relevant mPDTOs may allow a further understanding of such disease and foster therapeutically relevant advances. We believe that our points may be valid for other solid cancers.

Indexed as

GenomicMetastatic breast cancermulti-OMICSOrganoidsPDTOProteomic

Identifiers

PMID35983233
PMCPMC9355905
OpenAlexW4288070148

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.