ArticlePloS one2016
FISHtrees 3.0: Tumor Phylogenetics Using a Ploidy Probe.
Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Single-cell copy number calling and event history reconstruction.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2025Article
- Cancer phylogenetic inference using copy number alterations detected from DNA sequencing data.Cancer pathogenesis and therapy · 2025Review
- A war on many fronts: cross disciplinary approaches for novel cancer treatment strategies.Frontiers in genetics · 2024Review
- Single-cell resolved ploidy and chromosomal aberrations in nonalcoholic steatohepatitis-(NASH) induced hepatocellular carcinoma and its precursor lesions.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Tumor heterogeneity assessed by sequencing and fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) data.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2021Article
- Joint Clustering of Single-Cell Sequencing and Fluorescence In Situ Hybridization Data for Reconstructing Clonal Heterogeneity in Cancers.Journal of computational biology : a journal of computational molecular cell biology · 2021Article
- Article
- The evolution of single cell-derived colorectal cancer cell lines is dominated by the continued selection of tumor-specific genomic imbalances, despite random chromosomal instability.Carcinogenesis · 2018Article
- Aneuploidy, TP53 mutation, and amplification of MYC correlate with increased intratumor heterogeneity and poor prognosis of breast cancer patients.Genes, chromosomes & cancer · 2018Article
- Evolutionary scalpels for dissecting tumor ecosystems.Biochimica et biophysica acta. Reviews on cancer · 2017Review
- The evolution of tumour phylogenetics: principles and practice.Nature reviews. Genetics · 2017Review
- An Improved Binary Differential Evolution Algorithm to Infer Tumor Phylogenetic Trees.BioMed research international · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Advances in fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) make it feasible to detect multiple copy-number changes in hundreds of cells of solid tumors. Studies using FISH, sequencing, and other technologies have revealed substantial intra-tumor heterogeneity. The evolution of subclones in tumors may be modeled by phylogenies. Tumors often harbor aneuploid or polyploid cell populations. Using a FISH probe to estimate changes in ploidy can guide the creation of trees that model changes in ploidy and individual gene copy-number variations. We present FISHtrees 3.0, which implements a ploidy-based tree building method based on mixed integer linear programming (MILP). The ploidy-based modeling in FISHtrees includes a new formulation of the problem of merging trees for changes of a single gene into trees modeling changes in multiple genes and the ploidy. When multiple samples are collected from each patient, varying over time or tumor regions, it is useful to evaluate similarities in tumor progression among the samples. Therefore, we further implemented in FISHtrees 3.0 a new method to build consensus graphs for multiple samples. We validate FISHtrees 3.0 on a simulated data and on FISH data from paired cases of cervical primary and metastatic tumors and on paired breast ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) and invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC). Tests on simulated data show improved accuracy of the ploidy-based approach relative to prior ploidyless methods. Tests on real data further demonstrate novel insights these methods offer into tumor progression processes. Trees for DCIS samples are significantly less complex than trees for paired IDC samples. Consensus graphs show substantial divergence among most paired samples from both sets. Low consensus between DCIS and IDC trees may help explain the difficulty in finding biomarkers that predict which DCIS cases are at most risk to progress to IDC. The FISHtrees software is available at ftp://ftp.ncbi.nih.gov/pub/FISHtrees.
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.