Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39390249›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Cancer2024

Compressive stresses in cancer: characterization and implications for tumour progression and treatment.

Julia A Linke, Lance L Munn, Rakesh K Jain

Abstract readReview
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 65 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
65citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

65 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Understanding and targeting the tumour matrisome.Nature reviews. Clinical oncology · 2026
    Review
  6. Review
  7. Cancer pain.Nature reviews. Disease primers · 2026
    Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review

5 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.

Julia A LinkeEdwin L. Steele Laboratories, Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Lance L MunnEdwin L. Steele Laboratories, Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA. lmunn@mgh.harvard.edu.
Rakesh K JainEdwin L. Steele Laboratories, Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA. rjain@mgh.harvard.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7571-3548

Funding

Dissecting Pediatric Brain Tumor Microenvironment to Improve TreatmentR35CA197743 · NCI · MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL · PI JAIN, RAKESH K. · 2015 to 2020
$5.7M
Targeting physical stress-driven mechanisms to overcome glioblastoma treatment resistanceU01CA261842 · NCI · MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL · PI JAIN, RAKESH K., MUNN, LANCE L. · 2021 to 2025
$3.1M
Reprogramming PDAC tumor microenvironment to improve immunotherapyU01CA224348 · NCI · MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL · PI BOUCHER, YVES, JAIN, RAKESH K. · 2017 to 2021
$2.9M
Improving treatment of HER2+ breast cancer brain metastasis by targeting lipid metabolismR01CA259253 · NCI · MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL · PI JAIN, RAKESH K., VANDER HEIDEN, MATTHEW G. · 2021 to 2025
$2.3M
Reengineering obesity-induced abnormal microenvironment to improve PDAC treatmentR01CA208205 · NCI · MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL · PI FUKUMURA, DAI, JAIN, RAKESH K. · 2017 to 2020
$2.2M
Reprogramming the tumormicroenvironment to improve immunotherapy of glioblastomaR01CA269672 · NCI · MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL · PI Rakesh K. Jain · 2022 to 2026
$1.9M
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA208205NCI NIH HHS R01 CA259253NCI NIH HHS R01 CA269672NCI NIH HHS R35 CA197743NCI NIH HHS U01 CA224348NCI NIH HHS U01 CA261842
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Beyond their many well-established biological aberrations, solid tumours create an abnormal physical microenvironment that fuels cancer progression and confers treatment resistance. Mechanical forces impact tumours across a range of biological sizes and timescales, from rapid events at the molecular level involved in their sensing and transmission, to slower and larger-scale events, including clonal selection, epigenetic changes, cell invasion, metastasis and immune response. Owing to challenges with studying these dynamic stimuli in biological systems, the mechanistic understanding of the effects and pathways triggered by abnormally elevated mechanical forces remains elusive, despite clear correlations with cancer pathophysiology, aggressiveness and therapeutic resistance. In this Review, we examine the emerging and diverse roles of physical forces in solid tumours and provide a comprehensive framework for understanding solid stress mechanobiology. We first review the physiological importance of mechanical forces, especially compressive stresses, and discuss their defining characteristics, biological context and relative magnitudes. We then explain how abnormal compressive stresses emerge in tumours and describe the experimental challenges in investigating these mechanically induced processes. Finally, we discuss the clinical translation of mechanotherapeutics that alleviate solid stresses and their potential to synergize with chemotherapy, radiotherapy and immunotherapies.

Indexed as

Disease ProgressionNeoplasmsStress, MechanicalTumor MicroenvironmentAnimalsHumansMechanotransduction, Cellular

Identifiers

PMID39390249
PMCPMC12967324

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.