ArticlebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology2024
Marker selection strategies for circulating tumor DNA guided by phylogenetic inference.
Article in bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Motivation: Blood-based profiling of tumor DNA ("liquid biopsy") has offered great prospects for non-invasive early cancer diagnosis, treatment monitoring, and clinical guidance, but require further advances in computational methods to become a robust quantitative assay of tumor clonal evolution. We propose new methods to better characterize tumor clonal dynamics from circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA), through application to two specific questions: 1) How to apply longitudinal ctDNA data to refine phylogeny models of clonal evolution, and 2) how to quantify changes in clonal frequencies that may be indicative of treatment response or tumor progression. We pose these questions through a probabilistic framework for optimally identifying maximum likelihood markers and applying them to characterizing clonal evolution. Results: We first estimate a distribution over plausible clonal lineage models, using bootstrap samples over pre-treatment tissue-based sequence data. We then refine these lineage models and the clonal frequencies they imply over successive longitudinal samples. We use the resulting framework for modeling and refining tree distributions to pose a set of optimization problems to select ctDNA markers to maximize measures of utility capturing ability to solve the two questions of reducing uncertain in phylogeny models or quantifying clonal frequencies given the models. We tested our methods on synthetic data and showed them to be effective at refining distributions of tree models and clonal frequencies so as to minimize measures of tree distance relative to the ground truth. Application of the tree refinement methods to real tumor data further demonstrated their effectiveness in refining a clonal lineage model and assessing its clonal frequencies. The work shows the power of computational methods to improve marker selection, clonal lineage reconstruction, and clonal dynamics profiling for more precise and quantitative assays of tumor progression. Availability: https://github.com/CMUSchwartzLab/Mase-phi.git. Contact: russells@andrew.cmu.edu.
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.