ArticleCurrent opinion in systems biology2017
Modeling cancer rearrangement landscapes.
Article in Current opinion in systems biology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cell-cycle dependent DNA repair and replication unifies patterns of chromosome instability.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Characteristics of DNA macro-alterations in breast cancer with liver metastasis before treatment.BMC genomics · 2023Article
- Identifying synergistic high-order 3D chromatin conformations from genome-scale nanopore concatemer sequencing.Nature biotechnology · 2022Article
- Modeling tissue-specific breakpoint proximity of structural variations from whole-genomes to identify cancer drivers.Nature communications · 2022Article
- Comparison of Structural and Short Variants Detected by Linked-Read and Whole-Exome Sequencing in Multiple Myeloma.Cancers · 2021Article
- Revealing the impact of structural variants in multiple myeloma.Blood cancer discovery · 2020Article
- Distinct Classes of Complex Structural Variation Uncovered across Thousands of Cancer Genome Graphs.Cell · 2020Article
- Whole-Genome Sequencing in Cancer.Cold Spring Harbor perspectives in medicine · 2019Review
- Review
- Nuclear envelope rupture: little holes, big openings.Current opinion in cell biology · 2018Review
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
Abstract
Cancer genome sequences contain footprints of somatic mutational processes, whose analysis in large tumor sequencing datasets has revealed novel mutational signatures, correlative features of variant topography, and complex events. Many of these analytic results have yet to reconciled with decades of mechanistic genome integrity research performed in controlled model systems. However, a new generation of genome-integrity experiments combining computational modeling, data analytics, and high-throughput sequencing are emerging to link mechanisms to patterns. Conversely, analytic studies evaluating quantitative footprints of specific genome integrity hypotheses will be critical in fitting naturally occurring mutational patterns to the predictions of a particular mechanistic model. Such quantitative and mechanistic studies will form the foundation of an emerging systems biology of genome integrity.
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.