Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32873813›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2020

Currently favored sampling practices for tumor sequencing can produce optimal results in the clinical setting.

Lőrinc S Pongor, Gyöngyi Munkácsy, Ildikó Vereczkey, Imre Pete, Balázs Győrffy

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Lőrinc S Pongor *Department of Bioinformatics, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary.
Gyöngyi Munkácsy *Department of Bioinformatics, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary.
Ildikó VereczkeyNational Institute of Oncology, Budapest, Hungary.
Imre PeteNational Institute of Oncology, Budapest, Hungary.
Balázs GyőrffyDepartment of Bioinformatics, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary. gyorffy.balazs@med.semmelweis-univ.hu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Tumor heterogeneity is a consequence of clonal evolution, resulting in a fractal-like architecture with spatially separated main clones, sub-clones and single-cells. As sequencing an entire tumor is not feasible, we ask the question whether there is an optimal clinical sampling strategy that can handle heterogeneity and hypermutations? Here, we tested the effect of sample size, pooling strategy as well as sequencing depth using whole-exome sequencing of ovarian tumor specimens paired with normal blood samples. Our study has an emphasis on clinical application-hence we compared single biopsy, combined local biopsies and combined multi-regional biopsies. Our results show that sequencing from spatially neighboring regions show similar genetic compositions, with few private mutations. Pooling samples from multiple distinct regions of the primary tumor did not increase the overall number of identified mutations but may increase the robustness of detecting clonal mutations. Hypermutating tumors are a special case, since increasing sample size can easily dilute sub-clonal private mutations below detection thresholds. In summary, we compared the effects of sampling strategies (single biopsy, multiple local samples, pooled global sample) on mutation detection by next generation sequencing. In view of the limitations of present tools and technologies, only one sequencing run per sample combined with high coverage (100-300 ×) sequencing is affordable and practical, regardless of the number of samples taken from the same patient.

Indexed as

Genetic HeterogeneityGerm-Line MutationMutation RateBiopsyClonal EvolutionExomeExome SequencingFemaleGene FrequencyHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingHumansOvarian NeoplasmsSequence Analysis, DNA

Identifiers

PMID32873813
PMCPMC7463012

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.