ArticleClinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research2025
Analysis of Shared Variants between Cancer Biospecimens.
Article in Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Nonoperative Management of Mismatch Repair-Deficient Tumors.The New England journal of medicine · 2025Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
20 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeMutational data from multiple solid and liquid biospecimens of a single patient are often integrated to track cancer evolution. However, there is no accepted framework to resolve if individual samples from the same individual share variants due to common identity versus coincidence. EXPERIMENTAL
designUtilizing 8,000 patient tumors from The Cancer Genome Atlas across 33 cancer types, we estimated the background rates of co-occurrence of mutations between discrete pairs of samples across cancers and by cancer type. We developed a mutational profile similarity (MPS) score that uses a large background database to produce confidence estimates that two tumors share a unique, related molecular profile. The MPS algorithm was applied to randomly paired tumor profiles, including patients who underwent repeat solid tumor biopsies sequenced with Memorial Sloan Kettering-IMPACT (n = 53,113). We also evaluated the MPS in sample pairs from single patients with multiple cancers (n = 2,012), as well as patients with plasma and solid tumor variant profiles (n = 884 patients).
resultsIn unrelated tumors, nucleotide-specific variants are shared in 1.3% (cancer-type agnostic) and in 10% to 13% (cancer-type specific) of cases. The MPS method contextualized shared variants to specify whether patients had a single cancer versus multiple distinct cancers. When multiple tumors were compared from the same patient and an initial clinicopathologic diagnosis was discordant with molecular findings, the MPS anticipated future diagnosis changes in 28% of examined cases.
conclusionsThe use of a novel shared variant framework can provide information to clarify the molecular relationship between compared biospecimens with minimal required input.
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.