ArticleEvolutionary applications2019
Genomic clustering of fitness-affecting mutations favors the evolution of chromosomal instability.
Article in Evolutionary applications, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- In Silico Pan-Cancer Analysis Reveals Prognostic Role of the Erythroferrone (ERFE) Gene in Human Malignancies.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Article
- Progressing from Recurring Tissue Injury to Genomic Instability: A New Mechanism of Neutrophil Pathogenesis.DNA and cell biology · 2019Review
- Genomic clustering of fitness-affecting mutations favors the evolution of chromosomal instability.Evolutionary applications · 2019Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Most solid cancers are characterized by chromosomal instability (CIN)-an elevated rate of large-scale chromosomal aberrations and ploidy changes. Chromosomal instability may arise through mutations in a range of genomic integrity loci and is commonly associated with fast disease progression, poor prognosis, and multidrug resistance. However, the evolutionary forces promoting CIN-inducing alleles (hereafter, CIN mutators) during carcinogenesis remain poorly understood. Here, we develop a stochastic, individual-based model of indirect selection experienced by CIN mutators via genomic associations with fitness-affecting mutations. Because mutations associated with CIN affect large swaths of the genome and have the potential to simultaneously comprise many individual loci, we show that indirect selection on CIN mutators is critically influenced by genome organization. In particular, we find strong support for a key role played by the spatial clustering of loci with either beneficial or deleterious mutational effects. Genomic clustering of selected loci allows CIN mutators to generate favorable chromosomal changes that facilitate their rapid expansion within a neoplasm and, in turn, accelerate carcinogenesis. We then examine the distribution of oncogenic and tumor-suppressing loci in the human genome and find both to be potentially more clustered along the chromosome than expected, leading us to speculate that human genome may be susceptible to CIN hitchhiking. More quantitative data on fitness effects of individual mutations will be necessary, though, to assess the true levels of clustering in the human genome and the effectiveness of indirect selection for CIN. Finally, we use our model to examine how therapeutic strategies that increase the deleterious burden of genetically unstable cells by raising either the rate of CIN or the cost of deleterious mutations affect CIN evolution. We find that both can inhibit CIN hitchhiking and delay carcinogenesis in some circumstances, yet, in line with earlier work, we find the latter to be considerably more effective.
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.