Title |
Individual karyotypes at the origins of cervical carcinomas
|
---|---|
Published in |
Molecular Cytogenetics, October 2013
|
DOI | 10.1186/1755-8166-6-44 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Amanda McCormack, Jiang Lan Fan, Max Duesberg, Mathew Bloomfield, Christian Fiala, Peter Duesberg |
Abstract |
In 1952 Papanicolaou et al. first diagnosed and graded cervical carcinomas based on individual "abnormal DNA contents" and cellular phenotypes. Surprisingly current papilloma virus and mutation theories of carcinomas do not mention these individualities. The viral theory holds that randomly integrated, defective genomes of papilloma viruses, which are often untranscribed, cause cervical carcinomas with unknown cofactors 20-50 years after infection. Virus-free carcinomas are attributed to mutations of a few tumor-suppressor genes, especially the p53 gene. But the paradox of how a few mutations or latent defective viral DNAs would generate carcinomas with endless individual DNA contents, degrees of malignancies and cellular phenotypes is unsolved. Since speciation predicts individuality, we test here the theory that cancers are autonomous species with individual clonal karyotypes and phenotypes. This theory postulates that carcinogens induce aneuploidy. By unbalancing mitosis genes aneuploidy catalyzes chain reactions of karyotypic evolutions. Most such evolutions end with non-viable karyotypes but a few become new cancer karyotypes. Despite congenitally unbalanced mitosis genes cancer karyotypes are stabilized by clonal selections for cancer-specific autonomy. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United States | 10 | 20% |
United Kingdom | 3 | 6% |
Japan | 2 | 4% |
Dominica | 1 | 2% |
Thailand | 1 | 2% |
Ireland | 1 | 2% |
Spain | 1 | 2% |
Australia | 1 | 2% |
Canada | 1 | 2% |
Other | 0 | 0% |
Unknown | 30 | 59% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 48 | 94% |
Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 4% |
Scientists | 1 | 2% |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Unknown | 29 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Master | 9 | 31% |
Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 28% |
Student > Bachelor | 3 | 10% |
Researcher | 2 | 7% |
Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 7% |
Other | 3 | 10% |
Unknown | 2 | 7% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 10 | 34% |
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 6 | 21% |
Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 14% |
Psychology | 2 | 7% |
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 3% |
Other | 2 | 7% |
Unknown | 4 | 14% |