ReviewJournal of translational medicine2017
Cancer heterogeneity: converting a limitation into a source of biologic information.
Review in Journal of translational medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluation of false positive and false negative errors in targeted next generation sequencing.Genome biology · 2025Article
- Targeting the tumour cell surface in advanced prostate cancer.Nature reviews. Urology · 2025Review
- Article
- Advancing Cancer Therapy: The Role of KIF20A as a Target for Inhibitor Development and Immunotherapy.Cancers · 2024Review
- The spatio-temporal evolution of multiple myeloma from baseline to relapse-refractory states.Nature communications · 2022Article
- Automated multimodal fluorescence microscopy for hyperplex spatial-proteomics: Coupling microfluidic-based immunofluorescence to high resolution, high sensitivity, three-dimensional analysis of histological slides.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Article
- Swiss-PO: a new tool to analyze the impact of mutations on protein three-dimensional structures for precision oncology.NPJ precision oncology · 2021Article
- An engineered pancreatic cancer model with intra-tumoral heterogeneity of driver mutations.Lab on a chip · 2020Article
- Efficacy of direct current generated by multiple-electrode arrays on F3II mammary carcinoma: experiment and mathematical modeling.Journal of translational medicine · 2020Article
- Intratumor Heterogeneity of MYO18A and FBXW7 Variants Impact the Clinical Outcome of Stage III Colorectal Cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2020Article
- Genomics and the History of Precision Oncology.Surgical oncology clinics of North America · 2020Review
- Pyruvate Kinase M2: a Metabolic Bug in Re-Wiring the Tumor Microenvironment.Cancer microenvironment : official journal of the International Cancer Microenvironment Society · 2019Review
- DECO: decompose heterogeneous population cohorts for patient stratification and discovery of sample biomarkers using omic data profiling.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2019Article
- Single‑cell intratumoral stemness analysis reveals the involvement of cell cycle and DNA damage repair in two different types of esophageal cancer.Oncology reports · 2019Article
- Liquid Biopsy in Oral Cancer.International journal of molecular sciences · 2018Review
- From the Broad Phase II Trial to Precision Oncology: A Perspective on the Origins of Basket and Umbrella Clinical Trial Designs in Cancer Drug Development.Cancer journal (Sudbury, Mass.)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Analysis of spatial and temporal genetic heterogeneity in human cancers has revealed that somatic cancer evolution in most cancers is not a simple linear process composed of a few sequential steps of mutation acquisitions and clonal expansions. Parallel evolution has been observed in many early human cancers resulting in genetic heterogeneity as well as multilineage progression. Moreover, aneuploidy as well as structural chromosomal aberrations seems to be acquired in a non-linear, punctuated mode where most aberrations occur at early stages of somatic cancer evolution. At later stages, the cancer genomes seem to get stabilized and acquire only few additional rearrangements. While parallel evolution suggests positive selection of driver mutations at early stages of somatic cancer evolution, stabilization of structural aberrations at later stages suggests that negative selection takes effect when cancer cells progressively lose their tolerance towards additional mutation acquisition. Mixing of genetically heterogeneous subclones in cancer samples reduces sensitivity of mutation detection. Moreover, driver mutations present only in a fraction of cancer cells are more likely to be mistaken for passenger mutations. Therefore, genetic heterogeneity may be considered a limitation negatively affecting detection sensitivity of driver mutations. On the other hand, identification of subclones and subclone lineages in human cancers may lead to a more profound understanding of the selective forces which shape somatic cancer evolution in human cancers. Identification of parallel evolution by analyzing spatial heterogeneity may hint to driver mutations which might represent additional therapeutic targets besides driver mutations present in a monoclonal state. Likewise, stabilization of cancer genomes which can be identified by analyzing temporal genetic heterogeneity might hint to genes and pathways which have become essential for survival of cancer cell lineages at later stages of cancer evolution. These genes and pathways might also constitute patient specific therapeutic targets.
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.