FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2010040271> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2010040271 endingPage "366" @default.
• W2010040271 startingPage "363" @default.
• W2010040271 abstract "Arguably, the last 5 decades have witnessed the primacy of the notion that carcinogenesis was due to the accumulation of genomic mutations affecting a single cell1Hanahan D Weinberg RA The hallmarks of cancer.Cell. 2000; 100: 57-70Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (22068) Google Scholar that acquired the ability to proliferate indefinitely and generate a tumor. Throughout the years, those DNA mutations were thought to affect an increasing number of genes whose products (proteins) played regulatory roles in intracellular functions, causing one epithelial cell to become a tumor and eventually metastasize. Those gene mutations would affect the expression of multiple genes involved in the cell cycle,2Masague J G1 cell-cycle control and cancer.Nature. 2004; 432: 298-306Crossref PubMed Scopus (960) Google Scholar apoptosis,3Lowe SW Cepero E Evan G Intrinsic tumor suppression.Nature. 2004; 432: 307-315Crossref PubMed Scopus (1044) Google Scholar and/or differentiation,4Harris H A long view of fashions in cancer research.BioEssays. 2005; 27: 833-838Crossref PubMed Scopus (69) Google Scholar genes whose identities have, so far, remained elusive. Researchers who in the 1930s and 1940s favored this somatic mutation theory (SMT) were further energized by the resolution of the DNA structure in the early 1950s and the promises that this event heralded. This gene-centric view favored the adoption of a narrow reductionist approach to the study of cancer thus localized to the cellular and subcellular level of biological organization. Despite its popularity, the SMT has been challenged by epistemological considerations and by data.5Sonnenschein C Soto AM The Society of Cells: Cancer and Control of Cell Proliferation. Springer Verlag, New York1999Google Scholar, 6Soto AM Sonnenschein C The somatic mutation theory of cancer: growing problems with the paradigm?.BioEssays. 2004; 26: 1097-1107Crossref PubMed Scopus (221) Google Scholar, 7Trosko JE Chang CC Upham BL Mackerer CR Ignored hallmarks of carcinogenesis: stem cells and cell-cell communication.Ann NY Acad Sci. 2004; 1028: 192-201Crossref PubMed Scopus (103) Google Scholar Oftentimes, these objections were dismissed by adopting new ad hoc explanations that temporarily rescued the credibility of this theory,8Weinstein IB Cancer. Addiction to oncogenes—the Achilles heal of cancer.Science. 2002; 297: 63-64Crossref PubMed Scopus (1472) Google Scholar not unlike the epicycles created by pre-Copernican scholars that made data fit the mistaken idea of a geocentric planetary system.9Sonnenschein C Soto AM The somatic mutation theory of carcinogenesis: why it should be dropped and replaced.Mol Carcinog. 2000; 29: 1-7Crossref PubMed Scopus (126) Google Scholar It is seldom acknowledged, however, that early on researchers with a keen understanding of embryology, physiology, and pathology offered a sound alternative to the SMT. For instance, J. Needham10Needham J New advances in chemistry and biology of organized growth.Proc R Soc Lond (Biol). 1936; 29: 1577-1626Google Scholar and C.H. Waddington11Waddington CH Cancer and the theory of organizers.Nature. 1935; 135: 606-608Crossref Scopus (76) Google Scholar in the 1930s, and later on J.W. Orr,12Orr JW The mechanism of chemical carcinogenesis.Br Med Bull. 1958; 14: 99-101PubMed Google Scholar C.J. Dawe,13Dawe CJ Epithelial-mesenchymal interactions in relation to the genesis of polyoma virus-induced tumours of mouse salivary gland.in: Tarin D Tissue Interaction in Carcinogenesis. Academic Press, London1972: 305-358Google Scholar D. Tarin,14Tarin D Histological evidence of disturbed tissue interactions in human preneoplastic and neoplastic skin.in: Tarin D Tissue Interactions in Carcinogenesis. Academic Press, New York1972: 95-125Google Scholar C.M. Nelson and M.J. Bissell15Nelson CM Bissell MJ Modeling dynamic reciprocity: engineering three-dimensional culture models of breast architecture, function, and neoplastic transformation.Semin Cancer Biol. 2005; 15: 342-352Crossref PubMed Scopus (271) Google Scholar and others looked at cancer as a problem akin to development gone awry, that is, a supracellular, tri-dimensional, emergent disease of tissue architecture. Finally, in the last decade an increasing number of groups have generated data that both implicitly and explicitly favor switching the emphasis from searching for intracellular targets of carcinogens to instead looking at interactions among epithelial and stroma cells and the extracellular matrix as the determinants of normalcy and/or cancer.16Barcellos-Hoff MH Ravani SA Irradiated mammary gland stroma promotes the expression of tumorigenic potential by unirradiated epithelial cells.Cancer Res. 2000; 60: 1254-1260PubMed Google Scholar, 17Coussens LM Werb Z Inflammation and cancer.Nature. 2002; 420: 860-867Crossref PubMed Scopus (11047) Google Scholar, 18Kunz-Schughart LA Knuechel R Tumor-associated fibroblasts (part II): functional impact on tumor tissue.Histol Histopathol. 2002; 17: 623-637PubMed Google Scholar, 19Maffini MV Soto AM Calabro JM Ucci AA Sonnenschein C The stroma as a crucial target in rat mammary gland carcinogenesis.J Cell Sci. 2004; 117: 1495-1502Crossref PubMed Scopus (311) Google Scholar, 20Maffini MV, Calabro JM, Soto AM, Sonnenschein C: Stromal regulation of neoplastic development: age-dependent normalization of neoplastic mammary cells by mammary stroma. Am J Pathol (in press)Google Scholar, 21Alt-Holland A Zhang W Margulis A Garlick JA Microenvironmental control of premalignant disease: the role of intercellular adhesion in the progression of squamous cell carcinoma.Semin Cancer Biol. 2005; 15: 84-96Crossref PubMed Scopus (34) Google Scholar For the most part, these approaches have attempted to ontologically meld the SMT with the alternative notion that carcinogens target stromal cells (fibroblasts, adipocytes, mast cells, macrophages, and so forth) and the extracellular matrix (collagen, elastic and reticular fibers, ground substance, and so forth). Based on epistemological and pragmatic approaches, challenges have been aimed at the original SMT and to this recent synthetic approach.5Sonnenschein C Soto AM The Society of Cells: Cancer and Control of Cell Proliferation. Springer Verlag, New York1999Google Scholar, 6Soto AM Sonnenschein C The somatic mutation theory of cancer: growing problems with the paradigm?.BioEssays. 2004; 26: 1097-1107Crossref PubMed Scopus (221) Google Scholar, 20Maffini MV, Calabro JM, Soto AM, Sonnenschein C: Stromal regulation of neoplastic development: age-dependent normalization of neoplastic mammary cells by mammary stroma. Am J Pathol (in press)Google Scholar, 21Alt-Holland A Zhang W Margulis A Garlick JA Microenvironmental control of premalignant disease: the role of intercellular adhesion in the progression of squamous cell carcinoma.Semin Cancer Biol. 2005; 15: 84-96Crossref PubMed Scopus (34) Google Scholar In this issue of The American Journal of Pathology, while using a three-dimensional in vitro assay and a surrogate animal model, McDaniel and colleagues22McDaniel SM Rumer KK Biroc SL Metz RP Singh M Porter W Schedin P Remodeling of the mammary microenvironment after lactation promotes breast tumor cell metastasis.Am J Pathol. 2005; 168: 608-620Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF Scopus (172) Google Scholar present evidence that favors the general notion that the stroma plays a major role in affecting the behavior of the mammary gland epithelium during normalcy, carcinogenesis, invasion, and metastasis. Their quest began after the observation that during postlactational involution of the mammary gland, the stroma displays many properties that are also observed during wound healing and inflammation. Because chronic inflammation is a crucial risk factor for development of gastric and colon cancers, they hypothesized that the remodeling stroma during postlactational involution of the mammary gland may also support the development of mammary cancer. Consequently, these researchers focused their interest on the hormonal and reproductive status of the host as determinants of the behavior of the stroma on the proliferative and invasive behavior of primary and metastatic tumor masses. First, they observed biochemical differences in the matrix composition of involuting and resting mammary glands. Next, they compared the in vitro behavior of human breast epithelial cells exposed to Matrigel (an extracellular matrix preparation derived from an ascitic rodent tumor) and to extracellular matrices from nulliparous young rats and from lactating mammary glands undergoing weaning-induced involution. Interestingly, McDaniel and colleagues22McDaniel SM Rumer KK Biroc SL Metz RP Singh M Porter W Schedin P Remodeling of the mammary microenvironment after lactation promotes breast tumor cell metastasis.Am J Pathol. 2005; 168: 608-620Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF Scopus (172) Google Scholar found that nulliparous matrix promoted organization of normal ducts by the (probably) normal MCF12A human breast cells whereas Matrigel allowed only the development of hollow epithelial cell spheres (mammospheres). In contrast, matrix from involuting mammary glands did not favor the formation of ductal structures by MCF12A cells; instead, these cells organized into mammospheres similar to those observed using Matrigel as a substrate. In addition, the nulliparous matrix preparation tamed the invasive properties of MDA-MB-231 human breast malignant cells. In contrast, matrix from involuting mammary glands favored MDA-MB-231 invasiveness. Perceptively, McDaniel and colleagues22McDaniel SM Rumer KK Biroc SL Metz RP Singh M Porter W Schedin P Remodeling of the mammary microenvironment after lactation promotes breast tumor cell metastasis.Am J Pathol. 2005; 168: 608-620Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF Scopus (172) Google Scholar next evaluated the influence of the above-mentioned matrices on the metastatic properties of the MDA-MB-231 cells. For this purpose, these cells were mixed with matrix and injected orthotopically into the mammary glands of nude mice. In this way they tried to overcome the valid criticism that these are just in vitro quirks. The results showed an increased incidence of mammary gland metastasis in the liver, lung, and kidney when the MDA-MB-231 cells were mixed with the matrix from involuting mammary glands. Moreover, angiogenic responses and reactive stroma were most frequently observed in the tumor/mammary gland border of primary tumors that resulted from an inoculum of cancer cells mixed with the matrix extracted from the involution group. As the authors note, the fact that a small inoculum of cells mixed with matrix resulted in long-lasting effects on angiogenesis, reactive stroma formation, and the ability to metastasize suggests that the matrix possesses inductive effects that most likely operate epigenetically rather than through mutational events. These data also shed light on epidemiological evidence showing that pregnancy, even at an earlier age, is associated with a transient increase in the risk of breast cancer.23Rosner B Colditz GA Willett WC Reproductive risk factors in a prospective study of breast cancer: the nurses' health study.Am J Epidemiol. 1994; 139: 819-835PubMed Google Scholar, 24Albrektsen G Heuch I Hansen S Kvale G Breast cancer risk by age at birth, time since birth and time intervals between births: exploring interaction effects.Br J Cancer. 2005; 92: 167-175Crossref PubMed Scopus (203) Google Scholar, 25Daling JR Malone KE Doody DR Anderson BO Porter PL The relation of reproductive factors to mortality from breast cancer.Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2002; 11: 235-241PubMed Google Scholar Indeed, the experiments reported in the article by McDaniel and colleagues22McDaniel SM Rumer KK Biroc SL Metz RP Singh M Porter W Schedin P Remodeling of the mammary microenvironment after lactation promotes breast tumor cell metastasis.Am J Pathol. 2005; 168: 608-620Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF Scopus (172) Google Scholar suggest a potential for altered organization of the epithelium, enhanced invasiveness, and metastatic potential due to involution. Moreover, pregnancy-related cancer is associated with a poor prognosis due to higher incidence of metastatic disease, a phenomenon linked to the involuting matrix in the experiments by McDaniel and colleagues.22McDaniel SM Rumer KK Biroc SL Metz RP Singh M Porter W Schedin P Remodeling of the mammary microenvironment after lactation promotes breast tumor cell metastasis.Am J Pathol. 2005; 168: 608-620Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF Scopus (172) Google Scholar The approach adopted by McDaniel and colleagues22McDaniel SM Rumer KK Biroc SL Metz RP Singh M Porter W Schedin P Remodeling of the mammary microenvironment after lactation promotes breast tumor cell metastasis.Am J Pathol. 2005; 168: 608-620Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF Scopus (172) Google Scholar is novel. It warrants being pursued under comparable and additional conditions using other surrogate models to extend and solidify the value of these important original data. Together with other data stemming from the use of these tissue-based approaches to carcinogenesis and metastasis, a fully clarified view of the multiple interactions among the many components of the stroma and the epithelial cells in the mammary gland of rodents, and eventually in the human breast, should emerge. While these additional data are being collected, some speculative options can be offered based on the data already at hand. An unbiased observer might conclude, for instance, that carcinogenesis and metastasis are prominently influenced by interactions stemming from extracellular protagonists that influence the proliferation pattern and the phenotypic properties of discrete tumor cells and these cells will form normal or carcinogenic tissue patterns under rules mostly dictated by their extracellular context rather than by their intracellular genetic designs. Altogether, these data do not readily fit into the SMT. More importantly, the evidence collected by McDaniel and colleagues,22McDaniel SM Rumer KK Biroc SL Metz RP Singh M Porter W Schedin P Remodeling of the mammary microenvironment after lactation promotes breast tumor cell metastasis.Am J Pathol. 2005; 168: 608-620Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF Scopus (172) Google Scholar and that previously collected by others using rodent mammary gland, skin, and other surrogate models, indicate that an explanation of carcinogenesis and metastasis at the cellular or subcellular levels is incomplete, if not plain irrelevant.16Barcellos-Hoff MH Ravani SA Irradiated mammary gland stroma promotes the expression of tumorigenic potential by unirradiated epithelial cells.Cancer Res. 2000; 60: 1254-1260PubMed Google Scholar, 18Kunz-Schughart LA Knuechel R Tumor-associated fibroblasts (part II): functional impact on tumor tissue.Histol Histopathol. 2002; 17: 623-637PubMed Google Scholar, 19Maffini MV Soto AM Calabro JM Ucci AA Sonnenschein C The stroma as a crucial target in rat mammary gland carcinogenesis.J Cell Sci. 2004; 117: 1495-1502Crossref PubMed Scopus (311) Google Scholar, 20Maffini MV, Calabro JM, Soto AM, Sonnenschein C: Stromal regulation of neoplastic development: age-dependent normalization of neoplastic mammary cells by mammary stroma. Am J Pathol (in press)Google Scholar, 26Kunz-Schughart LA Knuechel R Tumor-associated fibroblasts (part I): active stromal participants in tumor development and progression?.Histol Histopathol. 2002; 17: 599-621PubMed Google Scholar Organisms build themselves, both in normalcy and disease, by using all of the resources available to them, including gene products and the intracellular, intercellular, extracellular, and external environments. This realization carries with it the implication, alluded to by Ernst Mayr27Mayr E The Growth of Biological Thought: Diversity, Evolution, and Inheritance. Belknap Press, Cambridge1982: 1-146Google Scholar a quarter of a century ago that, for most biological phenomena, exploring levels of complexity lower than that at which the phenomenon of interest occurs, usually adds little to what was learned at the original level of inquiry. As an exemplifying analogy, understanding the structure of the muscle protein myosin has not significantly contributed to the explanation of how the heart works as a pump. Regarding cancer, the record shows that describing ever more elaborate gene mutation combinations, signal transduction anomalies and aberrant gene expression patterns is unlikely to add significantly to the explanation of a process that takes place at a level of organization that is higher than the one where these biochemical events occur.5Sonnenschein C Soto AM The Society of Cells: Cancer and Control of Cell Proliferation. Springer Verlag, New York1999Google Scholar, 28Jacks T Weinberg RA Taking the study of cancer cell survival to a new dimension.Cell. 2002; 111: 923-925Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (247) Google Scholar Although the work of McDaniel and colleagues22McDaniel SM Rumer KK Biroc SL Metz RP Singh M Porter W Schedin P Remodeling of the mammary microenvironment after lactation promotes breast tumor cell metastasis.Am J Pathol. 2005; 168: 608-620Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF Scopus (172) Google Scholar as well as others stresses the role of the supracellular level of organization, the cancer community, guided by its traditional reductionistic bent, is finding a new way to explain the neoplastic phenotype in the intracellular compartment by proposing that epigenetic changes, such as aberrant patterns of DNA and histone methylation and acetylation or chromatin organization, play a causal role in neoplasia.29Fraga MF Esteller M Towards the human cancer epigenome: a first draft of histone modifications.Cell Cycle. 2005; 4: 1377-1381Crossref PubMed Scopus (145) Google Scholar, 30Esteller M Aberrant DNA methylation as a cancer-inducing mechanism.Annu Rev Pharmocol Toxicol. 2005; 45: 629-656Crossref PubMed Scopus (459) Google Scholar, 31Laird PW Cancer epigenetics.Hum Mol Gen. 2005; 14: R65-R76Crossref PubMed Scopus (437) Google Scholar, 32Lund AH van Lohuizen M Epigenetics and cancer.Genes Dev. 2004; 18: 2315-2335Crossref PubMed Scopus (420) Google Scholar Research in these emerging fields of gene imprinting and regulation of gene activation by chromatin remodeling during development, carcinogenesis, and metastasis should be encouraged for their own sake. However, this option would again divert the attention of cancer researchers toward a reductionist resolution of a disease whose explanation appears, instead, to be at the tissue level of biological complexity. In this regard, it is worth remembering the sober words of John Cairns33Cairns JM Cancer, Science, and Society. Freeman Publishing, San Francisco1978Google Scholar who wrote some years ago, “Biology and cancer research have developed together. Invariably, at each stage, the characteristics of the cancer cells have been ascribed to some defect in whatever branch of biology happens at the time to be fashionable and exciting.” Thus, it is not surprising that experimental data that cannot be explained by DNA mutations in the context of the SMT might be interpreted as suggesting the involvement of epigenetic mechanisms related to gene transcription. This new epicycle still points to the interior of an epithelial cell that may eventually become a tumor. Are the current and the above-referred compelling contributions a part of an incoming trend in which the SMT is being slowly and silently abandoned as a productive approach to explain cancer in favor of the soft landing of a research program lodged at a higher hierarchical level of organization, namely, that of tissue-tissue interactions? Will cancer-funding agencies recognize this trend and support it with an enthusiasm comparable to that afforded to the now tattered SMT? In any case, will this new approach improve the chances for patients to be offered more efficient treatments than the ones now available? Experienced observers in the field of science at large, and cancer research in particular, usually recommend being cautious before dismissing old paradigms or accepting new ones. However, now that it is being more readily accepted that the genome is not the driver of development34Gilbert SF Sarkar S Embracing complexity: organicism for the 21st century.Dev Dyn. 2000; 219: 1-9Crossref PubMed Scopus (256) Google Scholar and that organicist views are again being appreciated in biology, it would probably be timely to extend these notions to the study of carcinogenesis and metastasis into organs other than the mammary gland. Finally, contributions by any member of the scientific community to unravel the cancer puzzle should be welcomed by everyone. Nevertheless, the case for pathologists to assertively participate in this field is now compelling. Sufficient experimental and clinical data have been accumulating during the last few decades to warrant their much more active participation in this field of research. It is high time to acknowledge the merits of the organicist views on cancer elegantly articulated by D.W. Smithers35Smithers DW Cancer: an attack of cytologism.Lancet. 1962; 1: 493-499Abstract PubMed Scopus (45) Google Scholar in the 1960s and mostly ignored by the reductionists. In short, the contributions of pathologists, ie, trained organicists, to cancer research at large and carcinogenesis in particular should be encouraged and welcomed. The current contribution by McDaniel and colleagues in this issue of The American Journal of Pathology,22McDaniel SM Rumer KK Biroc SL Metz RP Singh M Porter W Schedin P Remodeling of the mammary microenvironment after lactation promotes breast tumor cell metastasis.Am J Pathol. 2005; 168: 608-620Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF Scopus (172) Google Scholar together with other recent findings referred to above, speak favorably in this regard. We thank Cheryl Schaeberle and Laura Vandenberg for discussion and contributing to the final text of this article. Remodeling of the Mammary Microenvironment after Lactation Promotes Breast Tumor Cell MetastasisThe American Journal of PathologyVol. 168Issue 2PreviewThe mammary gland microenvironment during postlactational involution shares similarities with inflammation, including high matrix metalloproteinase activity, fibrillar collagen deposition, and release of bioactive fragments of fibronectin and laminin. Because inflammation can promote tumorigenesis, we evaluated whether the tissue microenvironment of the involuting gland is also promotional. Extracellular matrix was isolated from mammary glands of nulliparous rats or rats with mammary glands undergoing weaning-induced involution. Full-Text PDF" @default.
• W2010040271 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2010040271 creator A5012489838 @default.
• W2010040271 creator A5027267648 @default.
• W2010040271 date "2006-02-01" @default.
• W2010040271 modified "2023-09-25" @default.
• W2010040271 title "Carcinogenesis and Metastasis Now in the Third Dimension—What's in It for Pathologists?" @default.
• W2010040271 cites W1965037168 @default.
• W2010040271 cites W1981557521 @default.
• W2010040271 cites W1988865666 @default.
• W2010040271 cites W1998543559 @default.
• W2010040271 cites W2018116689 @default.
• W2010040271 cites W2018494545 @default.
• W2010040271 cites W2018600278 @default.
• W2010040271 cites W2032332194 @default.
• W2010040271 cites W2034269086 @default.
• W2010040271 cites W2035238501 @default.
• W2010040271 cites W2068848416 @default.
• W2010040271 cites W2079505803 @default.
• W2010040271 cites W2080415915 @default.
• W2010040271 cites W2085187751 @default.
• W2010040271 cites W2096127904 @default.
• W2010040271 cites W2098165400 @default.
• W2010040271 cites W2099292393 @default.
• W2010040271 cites W2103894337 @default.
• W2010040271 cites W2104605495 @default.
• W2010040271 cites W2105197987 @default.
• W2010040271 cites W2127449951 @default.
• W2010040271 cites W2136492640 @default.
• W2010040271 cites W2137161531 @default.
• W2010040271 cites W2160687667 @default.
• W2010040271 cites W2166315000 @default.
• W2010040271 cites W2254038116 @default.
• W2010040271 cites W2261991919 @default.
• W2010040271 cites W2290007428 @default.
• W2010040271 cites W4211231408 @default.
• W2010040271 cites W66751140 @default.
• W2010040271 doi "https://doi.org/10.2353/ajpath.2006.051084" @default.
• W2010040271 hasPubMedCentralId "https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/1606483" @default.
• W2010040271 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16436651" @default.
• W2010040271 hasPublicationYear "2006" @default.
• W2010040271 type Work @default.
• W2010040271 sameAs 2010040271 @default.
• W2010040271 citedByCount "5" @default.
• W2010040271 countsByYear W20100402712012 @default.
• W2010040271 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2010040271 hasAuthorship W2010040271A5012489838 @default.
• W2010040271 hasAuthorship W2010040271A5027267648 @default.
• W2010040271 hasBestOaLocation W20100402711 @default.
• W2010040271 hasConcept C121608353 @default.
• W2010040271 hasConcept C126322002 @default.
• W2010040271 hasConcept C142724271 @default.
• W2010040271 hasConcept C202444582 @default.
• W2010040271 hasConcept C2779013556 @default.
• W2010040271 hasConcept C33676613 @default.
• W2010040271 hasConcept C33923547 @default.
• W2010040271 hasConcept C555283112 @default.
• W2010040271 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W2010040271 hasConceptScore W2010040271C121608353 @default.
• W2010040271 hasConceptScore W2010040271C126322002 @default.
• W2010040271 hasConceptScore W2010040271C142724271 @default.
• W2010040271 hasConceptScore W2010040271C202444582 @default.
• W2010040271 hasConceptScore W2010040271C2779013556 @default.
• W2010040271 hasConceptScore W2010040271C33676613 @default.
• W2010040271 hasConceptScore W2010040271C33923547 @default.
• W2010040271 hasConceptScore W2010040271C555283112 @default.
• W2010040271 hasConceptScore W2010040271C71924100 @default.
• W2010040271 hasIssue "2" @default.
• W2010040271 hasLocation W20100402711 @default.
• W2010040271 hasLocation W20100402712 @default.
• W2010040271 hasLocation W20100402713 @default.
• W2010040271 hasLocation W20100402714 @default.
• W2010040271 hasOpenAccess W2010040271 @default.
• W2010040271 hasPrimaryLocation W20100402711 @default.
• W2010040271 hasRelatedWork W1999592441 @default.
• W2010040271 hasRelatedWork W2042568216 @default.
• W2010040271 hasRelatedWork W2081876857 @default.
• W2010040271 hasRelatedWork W2328017444 @default.
• W2010040271 hasRelatedWork W2965940304 @default.
• W2010040271 hasRelatedWork W3032164154 @default.
• W2010040271 hasRelatedWork W3117947951 @default.
• W2010040271 hasRelatedWork W4233094507 @default.
• W2010040271 hasRelatedWork W4239747313 @default.
• W2010040271 hasRelatedWork W4310275930 @default.
• W2010040271 hasVolume "168" @default.
• W2010040271 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2010040271 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2010040271 magId "2010040271" @default.
• W2010040271 workType "article" @default.