ArticlePLoS computational biology2024
Orchard: Building large cancer phylogenies using stochastic combinatorial search.
Article in PLoS computational biology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Scalable genotyping in fixed transcriptomes resolves clonal heterogeneity via single-cell sequencing.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Inferring cancer type-specific patterns of metastatic spread using Metient.Nature methods · 2026Article
- Inferring and summarizing tumor phylogenies from bulk DNA data.Algorithms for molecular biology : AMB · 2026Article
- PhyClone: accurate Bayesian reconstruction of cancer phylogenies from bulk sequencing.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2025Article
- Fast tumor phylogeny regression via tree-structured dual dynamic programming.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2025Article
- A regression based approach to phylogenetic reconstruction from multi-sample bulk DNA sequencing of tumors.PLoS computational biology · 2024Article
- A unique interplay of access and selection shapes peritoneal metastasis evolution in colorectal cancer.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Phylogenies depicting the evolutionary history of genetically heterogeneous subpopulations of cells from the same cancer, i.e., cancer phylogenies, offer valuable insights about cancer development and guide treatment strategies. Many methods exist that reconstruct cancer phylogenies using point mutations detected with bulk DNA sequencing. However, these methods become inaccurate when reconstructing phylogenies with more than 30 mutations, or, in some cases, fail to recover a phylogeny altogether. Here, we introduce Orchard, a cancer phylogeny reconstruction algorithm that is fast and accurate using up to 1000 mutations. Orchard samples without replacement from a factorized approximation of the posterior distribution over phylogenies, a novel result derived in this paper. Each factor in this approximate posterior corresponds to a conditional distribution for adding a new mutation to a partially built phylogeny. Orchard optimizes each factor sequentially, generating a sequence of incrementally larger phylogenies that ultimately culminate in a complete tree containing all mutations. Our evaluations demonstrate that Orchard outperforms state-of-the-art cancer phylogeny reconstruction methods in reconstructing more plausible phylogenies across 90 simulated cancers and 14 B-progenitor acute lymphoblastic leukemias (B-ALLs). Remarkably, Orchard accurately reconstructs cancer phylogenies using up to 1,000 mutations. Additionally, we demonstrate that the large and accurate phylogenies reconstructed by Orchard are useful for identifying patterns of somatic mutations and genetic variations among distinct cancer cell subpopulations.
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.