Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39452063›Full record

ArticleBiology2024

Cell Migration-Proliferation Dichotomy in Cancer: Biological Fact or Experimental Artefact?

Abdulaziz Alfahed

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Biology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
–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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
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

1 author.

Abdulaziz AlfahedDepartment of Medical Laboratory, College of Applied Medical Sciences, Prince Sattam bin Abdulaziz University, Alkharj 11942, Saudi Arabia.ORCID 0000-0001-7961-343X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The migration-proliferation dichotomy (MPD) has long been observed in cultured cancer cells. This phenomenon is not only relevant to tumour progression but may also have therapeutic significance in clinical cancer. However, MPD has rarely been investigated in primary cancer. This study aimed to either confirm or disprove the existence of MPD in primary cancer. Using primary gastric, colorectal and prostate cancer (GC, CRC and PCa) cohorts from the Cancer Genome Atlas and Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, this study interrogated the MPD phenomenon by utilising RNA-Seq-based proliferation (CIN70 signature) and migration (epithelial-mesenchymal transition) indices, as well as gene set enrichment analyses (GSEA). Alternative hypothetical migration-proliferation models-The simultaneous migration-proliferation (SMP) and phenotype-refractory (PR) models-were compared to the MPD model by probing the migration-proliferation relationships within cancer stages and between early- and late-stage diseases using chi-square and independent T tests, z-score statistics and GSEA. The results revealed an inverse relationship between migration and proliferation signatures overall in the GC, CRC and PCa cohorts, as well as in early- and late-stage diseases. Additionally, a shift in proliferation- to migration dominance was observed from early- to late-stage diseases in the GC and CRC cohorts but not in the PCa cohorts, which showed enhanced proliferation dominance in metastatic tumours compared to primary cancers. The above features exhibited by the cancer cohorts are in keeping with the MPD model of the migration-proliferation relationship at the cellular level and exclude the SMP and PR migration-proliferation models.

Indexed as

colorectal cancergastric cancergene set enrichment analysismigration indexmigration–proliferation dichotomyproliferation index

Identifiers

PMID39452063
PMCPMC11504154

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.