ArticlePloS one2019
Clonality analysis of pulmonary tumors by genome-wide copy number profiling.
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.
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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Next-Generation Sequencing vs. Clinical-Pathological Assessment in Diagnosis of Multiple Lung Cancers: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Thoracic cancer · 2025Pooled it
- Differential Diagnostic Value of Histology in MPLC and IPM: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Pooled it
- Utilizing clinical features, genetic mutations, and a 14-gene molecular assay for optimizing the management of multiple primary lung cancer.Translational lung cancer research · 2026Article
- The Added Value of Genome-Wide Copy Numbers to Objectively Resolve Clonality of Multiple Tumors With Pulmonary Involvement and Ambiguous or Inconclusive Mutational Diagnosis.JTO clinical and research reports · 2025Article
- CXCL1 and CXCL8: Reliable and feasible biomarkers differentiating intrapulmonary metastasis from multiple primary neoplasms in non-small cell lung cancers.Cancer biomarkers : section A of Disease markers · 2025Article
- [Non-small Cell Lung Cancer with Metachronous Mutations of EGFR and ALK Genes: A Case Report and Literature Review].Zhongguo fei ai za zhi = Chinese journal of lung cancer · 2024Review
- 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 · 2024Article
- Diagnosis and management of multiple primary lung cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Review
- False positivity in break apart fluorescence in-situ hybridization due to polyploidy.Translational lung cancer research · 2023Article
- Review
- Review
- Morphological and genetic heterogeneity of synchronous multifocal lung adenocarcinoma in a Chinese cohort.BMC cancer · 2021Article
- The Role of the ECM in Lung Cancer Dormancy and Outgrowth.Frontiers in oncology · 2020Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
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.