ArticlePloS one2013
Two Distinct Categories of Focal Deletions in Cancer Genomes.
Article in PloS one, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
22 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 44 citations in OpenAlex.
- Patterns of somatic uniparental disomy identify novel tumor suppressor genes in colorectal cancer.Carcinogenesis · 2015Pooled it
- Article
- Time is ticking faster for long genes in aging.Trends in genetics : TIG · 2024Review
- Comparative Genomics Provides Etiologic and Biological Insight into Melanoma Subtypes.Cancer discovery · 2022Article
- Pan-cancer analysis of mRNA stability for decoding tumour post-transcriptional programs.Communications biology · 2022Article
- CONET: copy number event tree model of evolutionary tumor history for single-cell data.Genome biology · 2022Article
- Rare germline copy number variants (CNVs) and breast cancer risk.Communications biology · 2022Article
- Deletion of a pseudogene within a fragile site triggers the oncogenic expression of the mitotic CCSER1 gene.Life science alliance · 2021Article
- Locus-specific transcription silencing at the FHIT gene suppresses replication stress-induced copy number variant formation and associated replication delay.Nucleic acids research · 2021Article
- Whole-genome sequencing of acral melanoma reveals genomic complexity and diversity.Nature communications · 2020Article
- Transcriptome sequencing analysis of mono‑ADP‑ribosylation in colorectal cancer cells.Oncology reports · 2020Article
- Article
- Retrotransposon insertions can initiate colorectal cancer and are associated with poor survival.Nature communications · 2019Article
- Review
- Whole genome sequencing puts forward hypotheses on metastasis evolution and therapy in colorectal cancer.Nature communications · 2018Article
- MACROD2 expression predicts response to 5-FU-based chemotherapy in stage III colon cancer.Oncotarget · 2018Article
- Fragile sites in cancer: more than meets the eye.Nature reviews. Cancer · 2017Review
- Hi-C as a tool for precise detection and characterisation of chromosomal rearrangements and copy number variation in human tumours.Genome biology · 2017Article
- Intra-patient Inter-metastatic Genetic Heterogeneity in Colorectal Cancer as a Key Determinant of Survival after Curative Liver Resection.PLoS genetics · 2016Article
- Somatic Copy Number Alterations at Oncogenic Loci Show Diverse Correlations with Gene Expression.Scientific reports · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
23 authors at 7 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
One of the key questions about genomic alterations in cancer is whether they are functional in the sense of contributing to the selective advantage of tumor cells. The frequency with which an alteration occurs might reflect its ability to increase cancer cell growth, or alternatively, enhanced instability of a locus may increase the frequency with which it is found to be aberrant in tumors, regardless of oncogenic impact. Here we've addressed this on a genome-wide scale for cancer-associated focal deletions, which are known to pinpoint both tumor suppressor genes (tumor suppressors) and unstable loci. Based on DNA copy number analysis of over one-thousand human cancers representing ten different tumor types, we observed five loci with focal deletion frequencies above 5%, including the A2BP1 gene at 16p13.3 and the MACROD2 gene at 20p12.1. However, neither RNA expression nor functional studies support a tumor suppressor role for either gene. Further analyses suggest instead that these are sites of increased genomic instability and that they resemble common fragile sites (CFS). Genome-wide analysis revealed properties of CFS-like recurrent deletions that distinguish them from deletions affecting tumor suppressor genes, including their isolation at specific loci away from other genomic deletion sites, a considerably smaller deletion size, and dispersal throughout the affected locus rather than assembly at a common site of overlap. Additionally, CFS-like deletions have less impact on gene expression and are enriched in cell lines compared to primary tumors. We show that loci affected by CFS-like deletions are often distinct from known common fragile sites. Indeed, we find that each tumor tissue type has its own spectrum of CFS-like deletions, and that colon cancers have many more CFS-like deletions than other tumor types. We present simple rules that can pinpoint focal deletions that are not CFS-like and more likely to affect functional tumor suppressors.
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.