ReviewFrontiers in pharmacology2026
Cellular memory after cancer therapy: persistence after drug withdrawal, maintenance across cell divisions, and responses to rechallenge.
Review in Frontiers in pharmacology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A fraction of tumor cells can survive therapy without acquiring stable resistance mutations and enter a drug-tolerant persister (DTP) state. After drug withdrawal, these cells may resume proliferation and regain drug sensitivity, retain phenotypic features that alter survival or death upon retreatment, or continue to evolve toward stable resistance. The DTP designation describes survival under therapeutic pressure but does not establish whether the associated state persists after treatment ends. The term post-treatment cellular memory is used here operationally for a treatment-associated state that remains detectable after adequate drug washout and can influence a later response. Evidence can be evaluated across three experimental dimensions: persistence after withdrawal, maintenance across subsequent cell divisions or clonal descendants, and a functional consequence upon re-exposure. These dimensions indicate different strengths of support rather than mandatory diagnostic criteria. The review therefore organizes representative studies by what was measured after withdrawal rather than by DTP markers or mechanisms alone. Recent work indicates that AP-1 can contribute to encoding treatment-associated transcriptional states and that CBP/p300 activity can help maintain an established reporter state, including after drug withdrawal; however, molecular persistence does not substitute for demonstrating altered function upon rechallenge with the original agent. Chromatin remodeling, transcriptional state transitions, antioxidant metabolism, autophagy, organelle homeostasis, and lineage plasticity may prolong residual-cell survival. Their biological consequences differ: some states decay after withdrawal, some create time-limited vulnerabilities to ferroptosis or to therapeutic targeting of anti-apoptotic dependencies, and others extend the interval during which genetic resistance can emerge. Lineage tracing, single-cell multi-omics, withdrawal-rechallenge experiments, and longitudinal sampling of minimal residual disease can help distinguish transient stress responses from persistent post-treatment states. These observations provide a rationale for testing whether treatment sequence and interventions during residual disease can be matched to the reversibility and vulnerabilities of residual states.
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.