ArticleCell death discovery2022
CD95 gene deletion may reduce clonogenic growth and invasiveness of human glioblastoma cells in a CD95 ligand-independent manner.
Article in Cell death discovery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Machine learning-based proteogenomic data modeling identifies circulating plasma biomarkers for early detection of lung cancer.Communications medicine · 2026Article
- CD95/Fas stoichiometry in future precision medicine.Cell death and differentiation · 2025Review
- IRE1 RNase controls CD95-mediated cell death.EMBO reports · 2024Article
- Regulation of anoikis by extrinsic death receptor pathways.Cell communication and signaling : CCS · 2023Review
- Ten Years of CRISPRing Cancers In Vitro.Cancers · 2022Review
- The dual role of the CD95 and CD95L signaling pathway in glioblastoma.Frontiers in immunology · 2022Review
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
Abstract
CD95 (Fas/APO-1) is a multifunctional cell surface receptor with antithetic roles. First described to mediate cell death, interactions of CD95 with its natural ligand, CD95L, have also been described to induce tumor-promoting signaling leading to proliferation, invasion and stem cell maintenance, mainly in cancer cells that are resistant to CD95-mediated apoptosis. While activation of CD95-mediated apoptosis in cancer cells may not be clinically practicable due to toxicity, inhibition of tumor-promoting CD95 signaling holds therapeutic potential. In the present study, we characterized CD95 and CD95L expression in human glioma-initiating cells (GIC), a glioblastoma cell population with stem cell features, and investigated the consequences of CRISPR-Cas9-mediated CD95 or CD95L gene deletion. In vitro, GIC expressed CD95 but not CD95L and were sensitive to CD95-mediated apoptosis. Upon genetic deletion of CD95, GIC acquired resistance to CD95L-induced apoptosis but exhibited inferior clonogenic growth, sphere-forming capacity, and invasiveness compared with control cells, suggesting the existence of CD95L-independent constitutive CD95 signaling with tumor-promoting properties in GIC. In vivo, GIC expressed CD95 and a non-canonical form of CD95L lacking the CD95-binding region. CD95 genetic deletion did not prolong survival in immunocompromised GIC-bearing mice. Altogether, these data indicate that canonical CD95L may not be expressed in human GIC and suggest the existence of a CD95L-independent CD95-signaling pathway that maintains some malignancy traits of GIC. The lack of altered survival of tumor-bearing mice after genetic deletion of CD95 suggests that CD95 signaling is not essential to maintain the growth of human GIC xenografted into the brains of nude mice. The ligand-independent tumor-promoting role of constitutive CD95 in our GIC models in vitro highlights the complexity and challenges associated with targeting CD95 with therapeutic intent.
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.