Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31618260›Full record

ArticlePloS one2019

Clonality analysis of pulmonary tumors by genome-wide copy number profiling.

Julien P L Vincenten, Hendrik F van Essen, Birgit I Lissenberg-Witte, Nicole W J Bulkmans, Oscar Krijgsman, Daoud Sie, Paul P Eijk, Egbert F Smit, Bauke Ylstra, Erik Thunnissen

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 14 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Genomic Staging of Multifocal Lung Squamous Cell Carcinomas Is Independent of the Comprehensive Morphologic Assessment.Journal of thoracic oncology : official publication of the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer · 2024
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Julien P L VincentenAmsterdam UMC, location VUmc, Department of Pulmonary Diseases, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-2567-1647
Hendrik F van EssenAmsterdam UMC, location VUmc, Tumor Genome Analysis Core, Cancer Center Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Birgit I Lissenberg-WitteAmsterdam UMC, location VUmc, Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Nicole W J BulkmansSpaarne Gasthuis, Department of Pathology, Haarlem, The Netherlands.
Oscar KrijgsmanNetherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Department of Molecular Oncology & Immunology, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Daoud SieAmsterdam UMC, location VUmc, Tumor Genome Analysis Core, Cancer Center Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Paul P EijkAmsterdam UMC, location VUmc, Tumor Genome Analysis Core, Cancer Center Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Egbert F SmitAmsterdam UMC, location VUmc, Department of Pulmonary Diseases, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Bauke YlstraAmsterdam UMC, location VUmc, Tumor Genome Analysis Core, Cancer Center Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Erik ThunnissenAmsterdam UMC, location VUmc, Department of Pathology, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Multiple tumors in patients are frequently diagnosed, either synchronous or metachronous. The distinction between a second primary and a metastasis is important for treatment. Chromosomal DNA copy number aberrations (CNA) patterns are highly unique to specific tumors. The aim of this study was to assess genome-wide CNA-patterns as method to identify clonally related tumors in a prospective cohort of patients with synchronous or metachronous tumors, with at least one intrapulmonary tumor. In total, 139 tumor pairs from 90 patients were examined: 35 synchronous and 104 metachronous pairs. Results of CNA were compared to histological type, clinicopathological methods (Martini-Melamed-classification (MM) and ACCP-2013-criteria), and, if available, EGFR- and KRAS-mutation analysis. CNA-results were clonal in 74 pairs (53%), non-clonal in 33 pairs (24%), and inconclusive in 32 pairs (23%). Histological similarity was found in 130 pairs (94%). Concordance between histology and conclusive CNA-results was 69% (74 of 107 pairs: 72 clonal and two non-clonal). In 31 of 103 pairs with similar histology, genetics revealed non-clonality. In two out of four pairs with non-matching histology, genetics revealed clonality. The subgroups of synchronous and metachronous pairs showed similar outcome for the comparison of histological versus CNA-results. MM-classification and ACCP-2013-criteria, applicable on 34 pairs, and CNA-results were concordant in 50% and 62% respectively. Concordance between mutation matching and conclusive CNA-results was 89% (8 of 9 pairs: six clonal and two non-clonal). Interestingly, in one patient both tumors had the same KRAS mutation, but the CNA result was non-clonal. In conclusion, although some concordance between histological comparison and CNA profiling is present, arguments exist to prefer extensive molecular testing to determine whether a second tumor is a metastasis or a second primary.

Indexed as

DNA Copy Number VariationsAdultAgedAged, 80 and overClone CellsComparative Genomic HybridizationDiagnosis, DifferentialErbB ReceptorsFemaleHumansLung NeoplasmsMaleMiddle AgedMutationNeoplasms, Second PrimaryProspective StudiesEGFR protein, humanErbB ReceptorsKRAS protein, humanProto-Oncogene Proteins p21(ras)

Identifiers

PMID31618260
PMCPMC6795528

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.