ArticleIEEE transactions on nanobioscience2013
Adjusting for background mutation frequency biases improves the identification of cancer driver genes.
Article in IEEE transactions on nanobioscience, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Driver mutation impact in Chinese hepatocellular carcinoma.PloS one · 2026Article
- Detection of genetic variation in bovineAnimal biotechnology · 2023Article
- Pan-cancer clinical impact of latent drivers from double mutations.Communications biology · 2023Article
- Untangling a complex web: Computational analyses of tumor molecular profiles to decode driver mechanisms.Journal of genetics and genomics = Yi chuan xue bao · 2020Review
- Finding driver mutations in cancer: Elucidating the role of background mutational processes.PLoS computational biology · 2019Article
- Article
- Overexpressed somatic alleles are enriched in functional elements in Breast Cancer.Scientific reports · 2017Article
- Functional variomics and network perturbation: connecting genotype to phenotype in cancer.Nature reviews. Genetics · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
A common goal of tumor sequencing projects is finding genes whose mutations are selected for during tumor development. This is accomplished by choosing genes that have more non-synonymous mutations than expected from an estimated background mutation frequency. While this background frequency is unknown, it can be estimated using both the observed synonymous mutation frequency and the non-synonymous to synonymous mutation ratio. The synonymous mutation frequency can be determined across all genes or in a gene-specific manner. This choice introduces an interesting trade-off. A gene-specific frequency adjusts for an underlying mutation bias, but is difficult to estimate given missing synonymous mutation counts. Using a genome-wide synonymous frequency is more robust, but is less suited for adjusting biases. Studying four evaluation criteria for identifying genes with high non-synonymous mutation burden (reflecting preferential selection of expressed genes, genes with mutations in conserved bases, genes with many protein interactions, and genes that show loss of heterozygosity), we find that the gene-specific synonymous frequency is superior in the gene expression and protein interaction tests. In conclusion, the use of the gene-specific synonymous mutation frequency is well suited for assessing a gene's non-synonymous mutation burden.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.