ArticleJournal of the National Cancer Institute2018
Effect Sizes of Somatic Mutations in Cancer.
Article in Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 61 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
61 citing papers in PubMed.
- Hyper-mutational processes provide a head-start for weak cancer drivers: Explaining atypical KRAS variants.PLoS computational biology · 2026Article
- Review
- Convergent Evolution in Tumor Genomes Targets Functional Domains.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Integrated genomic analyses identify oncogenic pathway interplay in hepatocarcinogenesis defining specific molecular subtypes.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Accelerating discovery of cancer causes for prevention in the era of rising early-onset cancers.Cell · 2026Review
- Competing subclones and fitness diversity shape tumor evolution across cancer types.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2026Article
- Mutational landscape of normal breast tissues adjacent to invasive breast cancer.Cell reports. Medicine · 2026Article
- Article
- EarlybioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Parallel and convergent dynamics in the evolution of primary breast and lung adenocarcinomas.Communications biology · 2025Article
- DiffInvex identifies evolutionary shifts in driver gene repertoires during tumorigenesis and chemotherapy.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Glioma mutational signatures associated with haloalkane exposure are enriched in firefighters.Cancer · 2025Article
- The theory of massively repeated evolution and full identifications of cancer-driving nucleotides (CDNs).eLife · 2024Article
- The evolutionary theory of cancer: challenges and potential solutions.Nature reviews. Cancer · 2024Review
- Rare Drivers at Low Prevalence with High Cancer Effects in T-Cell and B-Cell Pediatric Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Article
- Cancer Evolution: A Multifaceted Affair.Cancer discovery · 2024Article
- FAT4 Mutation is Related to Tumor Mutation Burden and Favorable Prognosis in Gastric Cancer.Current genomics · 2024Article
- Pairwise and higher-order epistatic effects among somatic cancer mutations across oncogenesis.Mathematical biosciences · 2023Article
- Single-cell phylogenies reveal changes in the evolutionary rate within cancer and healthy tissues.Cell genomics · 2023Article
- Mutation bias and the predictability of evolution.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2023Review
1 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
A major goal of cancer biology is determination of the relative importance of the genetic alterations that confer selective advantage to cancer cells. Tumor sequence surveys have frequently ranked the importance of substitutions to cancer growth by P value or a false-discovery conversion thereof. However, P values are thresholds for belief, not metrics of effect. Their frequent misuse as metrics of effect has often been vociferously decried, even in cases when the only attributable mistake was omission of effect sizes. Here, we propose an appropriate ranking-the cancer effect size, which is the selection intensity for somatic variants in cancer cell lineages. The selection intensity is a metric of the survival and reproductive advantage conferred by mutations in somatic tissue. Thus, they are of fundamental importance to oncology, and have immediate relevance to ongoing decision making in precision medicine tumor boards, to the selection and design of clinical trials, to the targeted development of pharmaceuticals, and to basic research prioritization. Within this commentary, we first discuss the scope of current methods that rank confidence in the overrepresentation of specific mutated genes in cancer genomes. Then we bring to bear recent advances that draw upon an understanding of the development of cancer as an evolutionary process to estimate the effect size of somatic variants leading to cancer. We demonstrate the estimation of the effect sizes of all recurrent single nucleotide variants in 22 cancer types, quantifying relative importance within and between driver genes.
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.