Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29422598›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Cancer2018

Genetic insights into the morass of metastatic heterogeneity.

Kent W Hunter, Ruhul Amin, Sarah Deasy, Ngoc-Han Ha, Lalage Wakefield

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Cancer, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 97 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
97citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

97 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Endovascular biopsy in neurointerventional surgery: A systematic review.Interventional neuroradiology : journal of peritherapeutic neuroradiology, surgical procedures and related neurosciences · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Observational
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article

37 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Kent W HunterLaboratory of Cancer Biology and Genetics, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA.
Ruhul AminLaboratory of Cancer Biology and Genetics, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA.
Sarah DeasyLaboratory of Cancer Biology and Genetics, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA.
Ngoc-Han HaLaboratory of Cancer Biology and Genetics, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA.
Lalage WakefieldLaboratory of Cancer Biology and Genetics, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA.

Funding

Genetic Modifiers of Intitiation and Progression of Mammary CancerZIABC011255 · NCI · DIVISION OF BASIC SCIENCES - NCI · PI HUNTER, KENT WILLIAM · 2010 to 2025
$33.2M
Development of TGF-beta antagonists for cancer therapyZIABC010881 · NCI · DIVISION OF BASIC SCIENCES - NCI · PI WAKEFIELD, LALAGE · 2009 to 2025
$12.5M
GENETIC MODIFIERS OF MAMMARY CANCER INITIATION/ PROGRESSZ01CP010146 · NCI · DIVISION OF CANCER EPIDEMIOLOGY AND GENETICS · PI HUNTER, KENT WILLIAM · 2000 to 2008
$3.3M
Intramural NIH HHS Z01 CP010146Intramural NIH HHS Z99 CA999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Tumour heterogeneity poses a substantial problem for the clinical management of cancer. Somatic evolution of the cancer genome results in genetically distinct subclones in the primary tumour with different biological properties and therapeutic sensitivities. The problem of heterogeneity is compounded in metastatic disease owing to the complexity of the metastatic process and the multiple biological hurdles that the tumour cell must overcome to establish a clinically overt metastatic lesion. New advances in sequencing technology and clinical sample acquisition are providing insights into the phylogenetic relationship of metastases and primary tumours at the level of somatic tumour genetics while also illuminating fundamental mechanisms of the metastatic process. In addition to somatically acquired genetic heterogeneity in the tumour cells, inherited population-based genetic heterogeneity can profoundly modify metastatic biology and further complicate the development of effective, broadly applicable antimetastatic therapies. Here, we examine how genetic heterogeneity impacts metastatic disease and the implications of current knowledge for future research endeavours and therapeutic interventions.

Indexed as

Genetic HeterogeneityAnimalsGenetic Predisposition to DiseaseHumansMiceNeoplasm MetastasisNeoplasmsNeoplasms, Experimental

Identifiers

PMID29422598
PMCPMC6290469

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.