Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38287107›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Cancer2024

Translating p53-based therapies for cancer into the clinic.

Sylvain Peuget, Xiaolei Zhou, Galina Selivanova

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Cancer, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 113 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
113citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
42.7field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

113 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 152 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. A p53Molecular therapy. Oncology · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Determinants of CBiomolecules · 2026
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article

53 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Sylvain PeugetDepartment of Microbiology, Tumour and Cell Biology, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Xiaolei ZhouInstitute of Bioengineering, École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Galina SelivanovaDepartment of Microbiology, Tumour and Cell Biology, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden. galina.selivanova@ki.se.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8698-4332
Karolinska Institutet · SEÉcole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Inactivation of the most important tumour suppressor gene TP53 occurs in most, if not all, human cancers. Loss of functional wild-type p53 is achieved via two main mechanisms: mutation of the gene leading to an absence of tumour suppressor activity and, in some cases, gain-of-oncogenic function; or inhibition of the wild-type p53 protein mediated by overexpression of its negative regulators MDM2 and MDMX. Because of its high potency as a tumour suppressor and the dependence of at least some established tumours on its inactivation, p53 appears to be a highly attractive target for the development of new anticancer drugs. However, p53 is a transcription factor and therefore has long been considered undruggable. Nevertheless, several innovative strategies have been pursued for targeting dysfunctional p53 for cancer treatment. In mutant p53-expressing tumours, the predominant strategy is to restore tumour suppressor function with compounds acting either in a generic manner or otherwise selective for one or a few specific p53 mutations. In addition, approaches to deplete mutant p53 or to target vulnerabilities created by mutant p53 expression are currently under development. In wild-type p53 tumours, the major approach is to protect p53 from the actions of MDM2 and MDMX by targeting these negative regulators with inhibitors. Although the results of at least some clinical trials of MDM2 inhibitors and mutant p53-restoring compounds are promising, none of the agents has yet been approved by the FDA. Alternative strategies, based on a better understanding of p53 biology, the mechanisms of action of compounds and treatment regimens as well as the development of new technologies are gaining interest, such as proteolysis-targeting chimeras for MDM2 degradation. Other approaches are taking advantage of the progress made in immune-based therapies for cancer. In this Review, we present these ongoing clinical trials and emerging approaches to re-evaluate the current state of knowledge of p53-based therapies for cancer.

Indexed as

Antineoplastic AgentsNeoplasmsHumansMutationProto-Oncogene Proteins c-mdm2Tumor Suppressor Protein p53Antineoplastic AgentsProto-Oncogene Proteins c-mdm2Tumor Suppressor Protein p53

Identifiers

PMID38287107
OpenAlexW4391323814

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.