4.7 Review

Single-cell methods in myeloproliferative neoplasms: old questions, new technologies

期刊

BLOOD
卷 141, 期 4, 页码 380-390

出版社

AMER SOC HEMATOLOGY
DOI: 10.1182/blood.2021014668

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPN) are a group of hematopoietic malignancies driven by aberrant JAK/STAT signaling. Cellular heterogeneity at the single-cell level provides new insights into MPN biology, which can help predict clinical course and improve treatment strategies for these cancers, leading to better outcomes for patients.
Myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPN) are a group of clonal stem cell-derived hematopoietic malignancies driven by aberrant Janus kinase-signal transducer and activator of transcription proteins (JAK/STAT) signaling. Although these are genetically simple diseases, MPNs are phenotypically heterogeneous, reflecting underlying intratumoral heterogeneity driven by the interplay of genetic and nongenetic factors. Their evolution is determined by factors that enable certain cellular subsets to outcompete others. Therefore, techniques that resolve cellular heterogeneity at the single-cell level are ideally placed to provide new insights into MPN biology. With these insights comes the potential to uncover new approaches to predict the clinical course and treat these cancers, ultimately improving outcomes for patients. MPNs present a particularly tractable model of cancer evolution, because most patients present in an early disease phase and only a small proportion progress to aggressive disease. Therefore, it is not surprising that many groundbreaking technological advances in single-cell omics have been pioneered by their application in MPNs. In this review article, we explore how single-cell approaches have provided transformative insights into MPN disease biology, which are broadly applicable across human cancers, and discuss how these studies might be swiftly translated into clinical pathways and may eventually underpin precision medicine.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据