Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29982740›Full record

ArticleNeuro-oncology2018

Copy number profiling across glioblastoma populations has implications for clinical trial design.

Patrick J Cimino, Lisa McFerrin, Hans-Georg Wirsching, Sonali Arora, Hamid Bolouri, Raul Rabadan, Michael Weller, Eric C Holland

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Neuro-oncology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 36 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Optimal managements of elderly patients with glioblastoma.Japanese journal of clinical oncology · 2022
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. The Influence of Gene Aberrations on Survival in ResectedCurrent oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2021
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Patrick J CiminoDepartment of Pathology, Division of Neuropathology, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington, USA.
Lisa McFerrinDivision of Human Biology, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington, USA.
Hans-Georg WirschingDivision of Human Biology, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington, USA.
Sonali AroraDivision of Human Biology, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington, USA.
Hamid BolouriDivision of Human Biology, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington, USA.
Raul RabadanDepartment of Biomedical Informatics and Department of Systems Biology, Columbia University, New York, New York, USA.
Michael WellerBrain Tumor Center and Department of Neurology, University Hospital and University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Eric C HollandDivision of Human Biology, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington, USA.
Fred Hutch Cancer Center · USUniversity of Zurich · CHColumbia University · USUniversity of Washington · US

Funding

Systematic pharmacological targeting of the core mechanisms responsible for maintaining cancer cell stateU54CA209997 · NCI · COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI CALIFANO, ANDREA, HONIG, BARRY H · 2016 to 2021
$10.9M
Topology of Cancer Evolution and HeterogeneityU54CA193313 · NCI · COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI IAVARONE, ANTONIO, RABADAN, RAUL · 2015 to 2020
$10.4M
NCI NIH HHS U54 CA193313NCI NIH HHS U54 CA209997
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Copy number alterations form prognostic molecular subtypes of glioblastoma with clear differences in median overall survival. In this study, we leverage molecular data from several glioblastoma cohorts to define the distribution of copy number subtypes across random cohorts as well as cohorts with selection biases for patients with inherently better outcome. Methods: Copy number subtype frequency was established for 4 glioblastoma patient cohorts. Two randomly selected cohorts include The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) and the German Glioma Network (GGN). Two more selective cohorts include the phase II trial ARTE in elderly patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma and a multi-institutional cohort focused on paired resected initial/recurrent glioblastoma. The paired initial/recurrent cohort also had exome data available, which allowed for evaluation of multidimensional scaling analysis. Results: Smaller selective glioblastoma cohorts are enriched for copy number subtypes that are associated with better survival, reflecting the selection of patients who do well enough to enter a clinical trial or who are deemed well enough to undergo resection at recurrence. Adding exome data to copy number data provides additional data reflective of outcome. Conclusions: The overall outcome for diffuse glioma patients is predicted by DNA structure at initial tumor resection. Molecular signature shifts across glioblastoma populations reflect the inherent bias of patient selection toward longer survival in clinical trials. Therefore it may be important to include molecular profiling, including copy number, when enrolling patients for clinical trials in order to balance arms and extrapolate relevance to the general glioblastoma population.

Indexed as

DNA Copy Number VariationsResearch DesignBiomarkers, TumorBrain NeoplasmsClinical Trials as TopicCohort StudiesDatabases, GeneticFemaleFollow-Up StudiesGene Expression ProfilingGlioblastomaHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalPrognosisBiomarkers, Tumor

Identifiers

PMID29982740
PMCPMC6120353
OpenAlexW2810621202

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.