Table 3.

Cross-validation of disruptors

Prototypical disruptors	Deregulated metabolism	Evasion of antigrowth signaling	Angiogenesis	Genetic instability	Immune system evasion	Replicative immortality	Sustained proliferative signaling	Tissue invasion and metastasis	Tumor promoting inflammation	Tumor microenvironment
BPA	+(319–322)	+(152)	+(323)	+(155,324,325)	0	+	+(154)	+(326–328)	+(329)	0
DBP	All via hormone disruption	0	+(165)	+(330)	0	0	+(165,166)	0	+(331)	0
Chlorothalonil	0	+(332)	0	+(138,333)	0	0	+(138)	0	+(158)	0
Lindane	+(179,180,334)	0	+(335)	+(243,336)	0	0	+(199,200)	0	+(155)	0
DDVP	+(337)	+(338)	0	+(339,340)	0	0	0	0	+(338,341)	0
MXC	0	0	0	+(342,343)	0	0	+(201)	0	+(344,345)	0
Oxyfluorfen	+(192)	0	+	0	0	0	+(192)	0	+(192)	0
DEHP	+(168,346)	+(169)	0	0	0	0	+(167)	0	+(347)	0
Linuronx	+(348)	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	+(349,350)	0

Disruptors of resistance to cell death were cross-validated for effects in other cancer hallmark pathways. Disruptors that were found to have opposing actions in a particular hallmark (i.e. anticarcinogenic) were denoted using ‘−’, whereas disruptors that were found to have promoting actions in a particular hallmark (i.e. carcinogenic) were denoted using ‘+’. In instances where reports on relevant actions in other hallmarks were mixed (i.e. reports showing both pro-carcinogenic potential and anticarcinogenic potential), the symbol ‘+/−’ were used. Finally, in instances where no literature support was found to document the relevance of a chemical in a particular aspect of cancer’s biology, were denoted using ‘0’.