Cancer Clones Revised

Abstract Cancers are hard to treat, and this is largely because cancer cells evolve and diversify through space and time, in patients. The study of clonal evolution relies on the study of cancer cell lineages, and the cutting of these lineages into clones, each clone representing cancer cells with distinctive properties relevant to cancer development and treatment. This notion of clone implies a (set of) simplification(s) that misrepresents the reality. The simplification has been useful and productive, but I argue that maintaining a critical awareness of what is done through this simplification can also be useful and productive. I distinguish three types of simplifications and show that each can offer a panel of therapeutic alternatives that may complement our arsenal of strategies in the battle against clones. The clinical challenge of better treating cancer partly relies on better defining (delineating) clones, but also partly on the more fundamental way we conceive clones. With or without changing the definition, changes in the way we conceive of clones induce changes in the way we treat clones.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Biological Theory
Published
2024-12-23
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s13752-024-00484-2
Citations
1
Primary Topic
CRISPR and Genetic Engineering
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.23

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Cancer Clones Revised

Lucie Laplane
1 citations
Biological Theory
CRISPR and Genetic Engineering
0.23
article

Cancer Clones Revised

Lucie Laplane
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Abstract Cancers are hard to treat, and this is largely because cancer cells evolve and diversify through space and time, in patients. The study of clonal evolution relies on the study of cancer cell lineages, and the cutting of these lineages into clones, each clone representing cancer cells with distinctive properties relevant to cancer development and treatment. This notion of clone implies a (set of) simplification(s) that misrepresents the reality. The simplification has been useful and productive, but I argue that maintaining a critical awareness of what is done through this simplification can also be useful and productive. I distinguish three types of simplifications and show that each can offer a panel of therapeutic alternatives that may complement our arsenal of strategies in the battle against clones. The clinical challenge of better treating cancer partly relies on better defining (delineating) clones, but also partly on the more fundamental way we conceive clones. With or without changing the definition, changes in the way we conceive of clones induce changes in the way we treat clones.

Biological TheoryVol. 20(4)
Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (FR), Inserm (FR), Institut Gustave Roussy (FR), Institut d'Histoire et de Philosophie des Sciences et des Techniques (FR), Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (FR)
James S. McDonnell Foundation, Ligue Contre le Cancer, Cancéropôle Ile de France
Openalex Percentile: Top 40%
CRISPR and Genetic Engineering
0.23
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Cancer Clones Revised — Lucie Laplane · Biological Theory (2024) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS