Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26456849›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Cancer2015

The mini-driver model of polygenic cancer evolution.

Francesc Castro-Giner, Peter Ratcliffe, Ian Tomlinson

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Cancer, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 74 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
74citing 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

74 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Reuniting philosophy and science to advance cancer research.Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society · 2023
    Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

14 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.

Francesc Castro-GinerMolecular and Population Genetics Laboratory, Wellcome Trust Centre for Human Genetics, University of Oxford, Oxford OX3 7BN, UK.
Peter RatcliffeHenry Wellcome Building for Molecular Physiology, Nuffield Department of Clinical Medicine, University of Oxford, Roosevelt Drive, Oxford OX3 7BN, UK.
Ian TomlinsonMolecular and Population Genetics Laboratory, Wellcome Trust Centre for Human Genetics, University of Oxford, Oxford OX3 7BN, UK.

Funding

Cancer Research UK 16459Wellcome Trust 090532/Z/09/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Much of cancer genetics research has focused on the identification of the most-important somatic mutations ('major drivers') that cause tumour growth. However, many mutations found in cancer might not be major drivers or 'passenger' mutations, but instead might have relatively weak tumour-promoting effects. Our aim is to highlight the existence of these mutations (termed 'mini drivers' herein), as multiple mini-driver mutations might substitute for a major-driver change, especially in the presence of genomic instability or high mutagen exposure. The mini-driver model has clinical implications: for example, the effects of therapeutically targeting such genes may be limited. However, the main importance of the model lies in helping to provide a complete understanding of tumorigenesis, especially as we anticipate that an increasing number of mini-driver mutations will be found by cancer genome sequencing.

Indexed as

Evolution, MolecularCell Transformation, NeoplasticHumansMutationNeoplasm ProteinsNeoplasmsNeoplasm Proteins

Identifiers

PMID26456849

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
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 Socratic graph.