ArticleScientific reports2021
Predicting pathogenic non-coding SVs disrupting the 3D genome in 1646 whole cancer genomes using multiple instance learning.
Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Structural variants in the 3D genome as drivers of disease.Nature reviews. Genetics · 2025Review
- CTCF: A misguided jack-of-all-trades in cancer cells.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2022Review
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Over the past years, large consortia have been established to fuel the sequencing of whole genomes of many cancer patients. Despite the increased abundance in tools to study the impact of SNVs, non-coding SVs have been largely ignored in these data. Here, we introduce svMIL2, an improved version of our Multiple Instance Learning-based method to study the effect of somatic non-coding SVs disrupting boundaries of TADs and CTCF loops in 1646 cancer genomes. We demonstrate that svMIL2 predicts pathogenic non-coding SVs with an average AUC of 0.86 across 12 cancer types, and identifies non-coding SVs affecting well-known driver genes. The disruption of active (super) enhancers in open chromatin regions appears to be a common mechanism by which non-coding SVs exert their pathogenicity. Finally, our results reveal that the contribution of pathogenic non-coding SVs as opposed to driver SNVs may highly vary between cancers, with notably high numbers of genes being disrupted by pathogenic non-coding SVs in ovarian and pancreatic cancer. Taken together, our machine learning method offers a potent way to prioritize putatively pathogenic non-coding SVs and leverage non-coding SVs to identify driver genes. Moreover, our analysis of 1646 cancer genomes demonstrates the importance of including non-coding SVs in cancer diagnostics.
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.