ArticleBritish journal of cancer1993
Suppression of anchorage-independent growth after gene transfection.
Article in British journal of cancer, 1993. 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, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A novel procedure for isolating anchorage-dependent cells has been developed. It involves negative selection of cells growing in suspension followed by clonal replica screening for anchorage-dependent growth. Cells which have regained anchorage-dependent growth have been isolated from a library of the Chinese hamster ovary cell line, CHO-K1, transfected with pSV2neo and human genomic DNA. One anchorage-dependent clone, 1042AC, has been studied in detail. Anchorage-dependent growth of 1042AC is stable when cultured as adherent monolayers, but revertants appear rapidly when cultured in suspension. Suppression is unlikely to be due to loss or mutation of hamster genes conferring anchorage-independent growth as hybrids between 1042AC and CHO-K1 have the suppressed phenotype of 1042AC. Furthermore, a population of cells obtained from the hybrid by selecting for revertants to anchorage-independent growth showed selective loss of the transgenome derived from 1042AC. The growth suppression was not due to transfection of the human Krev-1 gene, which has previously been shown to restore anchorage-dependent growth, nor was there any evidence of alteration in the endogenous hamster Krev-1 gene. However, evidence for a human gene being responsible for the suppressed phenotype has not been obtained yet.
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.