2012
DOI: 10.1182/blood-2012-01-405985
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Clonal competition with alternating dominance in multiple myeloma

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

15
471
0
15

Year Published

2013
2013
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
6
2
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 581 publications
(501 citation statements)
references
References 28 publications
15
471
0
15
Order By: Relevance
“…The existence of these dominant behaviours exhibited by the u 1 or u 2 populations are consistent with the principle of competitive exclusion of clonal sub-populations in heterogeneous tumours (Egan Keats et al, 2012;Leith et al, 1989). In Fisher et al (2013) the authors interpreted the experimental data, which showed suppression and reappearance of cancer clones in myeloma patients (Keats et al, 2012) and chronic lymphocytic leukaemia patients (Schuh et al, 2012), by suggesting that two subclones can exist in a dynamic equilibrium. While all these experimental studies record the survival/suppression of tumour clones in various cancers, they do not offer a mechanistic explanation for the factors that could lead to these behaviours.…”
Section: Conclusion and Discussionmentioning
confidence: 78%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The existence of these dominant behaviours exhibited by the u 1 or u 2 populations are consistent with the principle of competitive exclusion of clonal sub-populations in heterogeneous tumours (Egan Keats et al, 2012;Leith et al, 1989). In Fisher et al (2013) the authors interpreted the experimental data, which showed suppression and reappearance of cancer clones in myeloma patients (Keats et al, 2012) and chronic lymphocytic leukaemia patients (Schuh et al, 2012), by suggesting that two subclones can exist in a dynamic equilibrium. While all these experimental studies record the survival/suppression of tumour clones in various cancers, they do not offer a mechanistic explanation for the factors that could lead to these behaviours.…”
Section: Conclusion and Discussionmentioning
confidence: 78%
“…In this study, we will investigate the role of cancer mutation on the possibility of clonal competition with alternating dominance or even competitive exclusion between two cancer cell sub-populations (as discussed before, these types of competition have been observed experimentally (Leith et al, 1989;Keats et al, 2012;Schuh et al, 2012)). To this end, we will introduce a nonlocal model for cell-cell and cell-matrix adhesion for two populations of cells (this model is a generalization of the models in Armstrong et al (2006); Gerisch & Chaplain (2008); Painter et al (2015)).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…11,[36][37][38] Furthermore, recent evidence for clonal competition with alternating dominance of tumour subclones during disease progression suggests that the presence of genetic features at diagnosis may not allow conclusions to be made about their presence or absence at a later time during the disease course. [39][40][41] The database also fails to provide stringent information about treatment with novel agents. However, given that patients transplanted in the years 2004-2008 had the same outcome as patients transplanted in 1999-2003 (Supplementary Table 1), novel treatment modalities are unlikely to have had a major impact.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…3 The clinical heterogeneity of MM is due to the coexistence of different myeloma clones with various mutation patterns and subsequent biological and clinical behaviors. According to a Darwinian evolutionary model, the sequence in which therapies are performed may induce different biological responses in the different clones, with the eradication of an indolent clone and the growth of a more aggressive one.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%