Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38632274›Full record

ArticleNature communications2024

A cfDNA methylation-based tissue-of-origin classifier for cancers of unknown primary.

Alicia-Marie Conway, Simon P Pearce, Alexandra Clipson, Steven M Hill, Francesca Chemi, Dan Slane-Tan, Saba Ferdous, A S Md Mukarram Hossain, Katarzyna Kamieniecka, Daniel J White and 7 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nature communications, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 47 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
47citing papers in PubMed
11.9field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

47 citing papers in PubMed, 42 citations in OpenAlex.

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

17 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Alicia-Marie Conway *Nucleic Acid Biomarker Team, Cancer Research UK National Biomarker Centre, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2635-8206
Simon P Pearce *Bioinformatics and Biostatistics Team, Cancer Research UK National Biomarker Centre, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1680-5538
Alexandra Clipson *Nucleic Acid Biomarker Team, Cancer Research UK National Biomarker Centre, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4568-4173
Steven M HillBioinformatics and Biostatistics Team, Cancer Research UK National Biomarker Centre, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5909-692X
Francesca ChemiNucleic Acid Biomarker Team, Cancer Research UK National Biomarker Centre, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Dan Slane-TanNucleic Acid Biomarker Team, Cancer Research UK National Biomarker Centre, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Saba FerdousBioinformatics and Biostatistics Team, Cancer Research UK National Biomarker Centre, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
A S Md Mukarram HossainBioinformatics and Biostatistics Team, Cancer Research UK National Biomarker Centre, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2654-8982
Katarzyna KamienieckaBioinformatics and Biostatistics Team, Cancer Research UK National Biomarker Centre, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Daniel J WhiteNucleic Acid Biomarker Team, Cancer Research UK National Biomarker Centre, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Claire MitchellThe Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK.
Alastair KerrBioinformatics and Biostatistics Team, Cancer Research UK National Biomarker Centre, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9207-6050
Matthew G KrebsDivision of Cancer Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester and The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, UK.
Gerard BradyNucleic Acid Biomarker Team, Cancer Research UK National Biomarker Centre, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Caroline DiveNucleic Acid Biomarker Team, Cancer Research UK National Biomarker Centre, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK. caroline.dive@cruk.manchester.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1726-8850
Natalie CookDivision of Cancer Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester and The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, UK. natalie.cook17@nhs.net.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2606-1082
Dominic G RothwellNucleic Acid Biomarker Team, Cancer Research UK National Biomarker Centre, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK. dominic.rothwell@cruk.manchester.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8757-3893
Cancer Research UK · GBManchester Academic Health Science Centre · GBEngineering and Physical Sciences Research Council · GBThe Christie NHS Foundation Trust · GB

Funding

Cancer Research UK (CRUK) A20465Cancer Research UK (CRUK) A25254Cancer Research UK (CRUK) C5759/A27412
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cancers of Unknown Primary (CUP) remains a diagnostic and therapeutic challenge due to biological heterogeneity and poor responses to standard chemotherapy. Predicting tissue-of-origin (TOO) molecularly could help refine this diagnosis, with tissue acquisition barriers mitigated via liquid biopsies. However, TOO liquid biopsies are unexplored in CUP cohorts. Here we describe CUPiD, a machine learning classifier for accurate TOO predictions across 29 tumour classes using circulating cell-free DNA (cfDNA) methylation patterns. We tested CUPiD on 143 cfDNA samples from patients with 13 cancer types alongside 27 non-cancer controls, with overall sensitivity of 84.6% and TOO accuracy of 96.8%. In an additional cohort of 41 patients with CUP CUPiD predictions were made in 32/41 (78.0%) cases, with 88.5% of the predictions clinically consistent with a subsequent or suspected primary tumour diagnosis, when available (23/26 patients). Combining CUPiD with cfDNA mutation data demonstrated potential diagnosis re-classification and/or treatment change in this hard-to-treat cancer group.

Indexed as

Cell-Free Nucleic AcidsNeoplasms, Unknown PrimaryBiomarkers, TumorDNA MethylationHumansLiquid BiopsyBiomarkers, TumorCell-Free Nucleic Acids

Identifiers

PMID38632274
PMCPMC11024142
OpenAlexW4394891085

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.