ReviewCancers2024
When DNA Mutations Interplay with Cellular Proliferation: A Narrative History of Theories of Carcinogenesis.
Review in Cancers, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Genotoxicity effects in Cancer Patients: Evaluation by Micronucleus and Comet Assays and Correlation with Biochemical and Hematological Indices.F1000Research · 2026Article
- Molecular Docking and Pharmacokinetic Profiling of Nab-paclitaxel as Advanced Chemotherapeutic Agent Against HER-2 Positive Breast Cancer Patients.Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2024Article
- Prediction of Cancer Proneness under Influence of X-rays with Four DNA Mutability and/or Three Cellular Proliferation Assays.Cancers · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
While cancer is one of the most documented diseases, how normal cells become cancerous is still debated. To address this question, in the first part of this review, we investigated the long succession of theories of carcinogenesis since antiquity. Initiated by Hippocrates, Aristotle, and Galen, the humoral theory interpreted cancer as an excess of acid, the black bile. The discovery of the circulation of blood by Harvey in 1628 destroyed the basis of the humoral theory but revived the spontaneous generation hypothesis which was also promoted by Aristotle. In 1859, the theory of microbes promoted by Pasteur demonstrated the irrelevance of this last theory and contributed to the emergence of the germ cancer theory, opposed to the cellular theory of cancer, in which cancer was supposed to be caused by microbes or transformed cells, respectively. These theories were progressively refined by the notions of initiation, promotion, and progression thanks to advances in mutagenesis and cellular proliferation. In the second part of this review, recent discoveries and paradigms in carcinogenesis, notably the role of the protein ATM, a major actor of the stress response involved in both mutagenesis and cellular proliferation, were discussed to better understand the current state of the art of carcinogenesis.
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.