ReviewBMC ecology and evolution2023
Convergent TP53 loss and evolvability in cancer.
Review in BMC ecology and evolution, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Evolvability: progress and key questions.Bioscience · 2025Review
- Systematic profiling of cancer-fibroblast interactions reveals drug combinations in ovarian cancer.Molecular oncology · 2025Article
- Integrating Bibliometrics and Bioinformatics to Map Knowledge Structure, Trends, and Genetic Insights in Polycystic Ovary Syndrome and Tumors (2015-2024).Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2025Article
- p53 Genetics and Biology in Lung Carcinomas: Insights, Implications and Clinical Applications.Biomedicines · 2024Review
- Mutant TP53 promotes invasion of lung cancer cells by regulating desmoglein 3.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2024Article
- The Clinical and Genetic Landscape of Hereditary Cancer: Experience from a Single Clinical Diagnostic Laboratory.Cancer genomics & proteomicsArticle
- Comparative Expression Analysis ofCancer diagnosis & prognosisArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cancer cell populations evolve by a stepwise process involving natural selection of the fittest variants within a tissue ecosystem context and as modified by therapy. Genomic scrutiny of patient samples reveals an extraordinary diversity of mutational profiles both between patients with similar cancers and within the cancer cell population of individual patients. Does this signify highly divergent evolutionary trajectories or are there repetitive and predictable patterns?Major evolutionary innovations or adaptations in different species are frequently repeated, or convergent, reflecting both common selective pressures and constraints on optimal solutions. We argue this is true of evolving cancer cells, especially with respect to the TP53 gene. Functional loss variants in TP53 are the most common genetic change in cancer. We discuss the likely microenvironmental selective pressures involved and the profound impact this has on cell fitness, evolvability and probability of subsequent drug resistance.
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.