Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34262039›Full record

ArticleNPJ genomic medicine2021

Metastatic heterogeneity of the consensus molecular subtypes of colorectal cancer.

Peter W Eide, Seyed H Moosavi, Ina A Eilertsen, Tuva H Brunsell, Jonas Langerud, Kaja C G Berg, Bård I Røsok, Bjørn A Bjørnbeth, Arild Nesbakken, Ragnhild A Lothe and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in NPJ genomic medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 44 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
44citing papers in PubMed
4.6field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
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

44 citing papers in PubMed, 73 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

11 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Peter W Eide *Department of Molecular Oncology, Institute for Cancer Research, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.
Seyed H Moosavi *Department of Molecular Oncology, Institute for Cancer Research, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.
Ina A EilertsenDepartment of Molecular Oncology, Institute for Cancer Research, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.
Tuva H BrunsellDepartment of Molecular Oncology, Institute for Cancer Research, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.
Jonas LangerudDepartment of Molecular Oncology, Institute for Cancer Research, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.
Kaja C G BergDepartment of Molecular Oncology, Institute for Cancer Research, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.
Bård I RøsokK.G. Jebsen Colorectal Cancer Research Centre, Division for Cancer Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.
Bjørn A BjørnbethK.G. Jebsen Colorectal Cancer Research Centre, Division for Cancer Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.
Arild NesbakkenK.G. Jebsen Colorectal Cancer Research Centre, Division for Cancer Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.
Ragnhild A LotheDepartment of Molecular Oncology, Institute for Cancer Research, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1693-1032
Anita SveenDepartment of Molecular Oncology, Institute for Cancer Research, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway. anita.sveen@rr-research.no.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8219-6251
Oslo University Hospital · NO

Funding

Kreftforeningen (Norwegian Cancer Society) 182759-2016Kreftforeningen (Norwegian Cancer Society) 208336-2019
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Gene expression-based subtypes of colorectal cancer have clinical relevance, but the representativeness of primary tumors and the consensus molecular subtypes (CMS) for metastatic cancers is not well known. We investigated the metastatic heterogeneity of CMS. The best approach to subtype translation was delineated by comparisons of transcriptomic profiles from 317 primary tumors and 295 liver metastases, including multi-metastatic samples from 45 patients and 14 primary-metastasis sets. Associations were validated in an external data set (n = 618). Projection of metastases onto principal components of primary tumors showed that metastases were depleted of CMS1-immune/CMS3-metabolic signals, enriched for CMS4-mesenchymal/stromal signals, and heavily influenced by the microenvironment. The tailored CMS classifier (available in an updated version of the R package CMScaller) therefore implemented an approach to regress out the liver tissue background. The majority of classified metastases were either CMS2 or CMS4. Nonetheless, subtype switching and inter-metastatic CMS heterogeneity were frequent and increased with sampling intensity. Poor-prognostic value of CMS1/3 metastases was consistent in the context of intra-patient tumor heterogeneity.

Identifiers

PMID34262039
PMCPMC8280229
OpenAlexW3182666770

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.