ReviewGenome biology2022
Evaluating statistical approaches to define clonal origin of tumours using bulk DNA sequencing: context is everything.
Review in Genome biology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Identifying Locally Recurrent Versus Second Primary Breast Cancer: Genomic Versus Clinical Criteria from Carolina Breast Cancer Study Phase III.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2026Trial
- Genomic and spatial analysis of local recurrences following risk-adapted breast radiotherapy in the IMPORT trials.Breast cancer research : BCR · 2026Article
- In-depth Genetic and Molecular Characterization of Unilateral Coexisting Adrenal Cortical Adenoma and Carcinoma in the Context of MEN1 Syndrome.Endocrine pathology · 2026Article
- Case Report: Synchronous germlineFrontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Phylogenetic analysis of paired breast carcinomas identifies genetic events associated with clonal recurrence and invasive progression.The Journal of pathology · 2026Article
- MorphoITH: a framework for deconvolving intra-tumor heterogeneity using tissue morphology.Genome medicine · 2025Article
- Analysis of Shared Variants between Cancer Biospecimens.Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research · 2025Article
- Optimizing the NGS-based discrimination of multiple lung cancers from the perspective of evolution.NPJ precision oncology · 2025Article
- The Cancer Genome in the Long Reads Era.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2025Article
- Clonal Evolution in Healthy and Premalignant Tissues: Implications for Early Cancer Interception Strategies.Cancer prevention research (Philadelphia, Pa.) · 2023Review
- Local recurrence of submucosal invasive colorectal cancer after endoscopic submucosal dissection revealed by copy number variation.DEN open · 2023Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Clonal analysis of tumour sequencing data enables the evaluation of the relationship of histologically distinct synchronous lesions, such as co-existing benign areas, and temporally distinct tumours, such as primary-recurrence comparisons. In this review, we summarise statistical approaches that are commonly employed to define tumour clonal relatedness using data from bulk DNA technologies. We discuss approaches using total copy number, allele-specific copy number and mutation data, and the relative genomic resolution required for analysis and summarise some of the current tools for inferring clonal relationships. We argue that the impact of the biological context is critical in selecting any particular approach, such as the relative genomic complexity of the lesions being compared, and we recommend considering this context before employing any method to a new dataset.
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.