ArticleCancer research communications2023
Probabilistic Mixture Models Improve Calibration of Panel-derived Tumor Mutational Burden in the Context of both Tumor-normal and Tumor-only Sequencing.
Article in Cancer research communications, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Harnessing AACR Project GENIE to Define the Molecular Features of Desmoplastic Small Round Cell Tumor.Current issues in molecular biology · 2026Article
- Constructing the cure: engineering the next wave of antibody and cellular immune therapies.Journal for immunotherapy of cancer · 2025Review
- Tumor Mutation Burden Survey of AACR GENIE Database Revealed NTRK (NTRK+) and RET (RET+) Fusions Positive Colorectal Carcinoma (CRC) as Distinct Subsets.Cancer medicine · 2025Article
- Comprehensive Survey of AACR GENIE Database of Tumor Mutation Burden (TMB) Among All Three Classes (I, II, III) ofLung Cancer (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2025Article
- Characterization of Non-Monotonic Relationships between Tumor Mutational Burden and Clinical Outcomes.Cancer research communications · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Tumor mutational burden (TMB) has been investigated as a biomarker for immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) therapy. Increasingly, TMB is being estimated with gene panel-based assays (as opposed to full exome sequencing) and different gene panels cover overlapping but distinct genomic coordinates, making comparisons across panels difficult. Previous studies have suggested that standardization and calibration to exome-derived TMB be done for each panel to ensure comparability. With TMB cutoffs being developed from panel-based assays, there is a need to understand how to properly estimate exomic TMB values from different panel-based assays. Design: Our approach to calibration of panel-derived TMB to exomic TMB proposes the use of probabilistic mixture models that allow for nonlinear relationships along with heteroscedastic error. We examined various inputs including nonsynonymous, synonymous, and hotspot counts along with genetic ancestry. Using The Cancer Genome Atlas cohort, we generated a tumor-only version of the panel-restricted data by reintroducing private germline variants. Results: We were able to model more accurately the distribution of both tumor-normal and tumor-only data using the proposed probabilistic mixture models as compared with linear regression. Applying a model trained on tumor-normal data to tumor-only input results in biased TMB predictions. Including synonymous mutations resulted in better regression metrics across both data types, but ultimately a model able to dynamically weight the various input mutation types exhibited optimal performance. Including genetic ancestry improved model performance only in the context of tumor-only data, wherein private germline variants are observed. Significance: A probabilistic mixture model better models the nonlinearity and heteroscedasticity of the data as compared with linear regression. Tumor-only panel data are needed to properly calibrate tumor-only panels to exomic TMB. Leveraging the uncertainty of point estimates from these models better informs cohort stratification in terms of TMB.
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.