ArticleBMC medicine2025
Exploration of the clonal evolution and construction of the tumor clonal evolution rate as a prognostic indicator in metastatic breast cancer.
Article in BMC medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Research trends and hotspots of circulating tumor DNA in colorectal cancer: a bibliometric study.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Pooled it
- Beyond Molecular Classification in Metastatic Triple-Negative Breast Cancer: Toward Subtype-Guided Precision Oncology.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- The Current Landscape of Metastatic Breast Cancer: A Pathology Guide on Emerging Biomarkers.Cancers · 2026Review
- Review
- Review
- Advancing breast cancer treatment through dual targeting CAR T cell therapy.Discover oncology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTumor heterogeneity and clonal evolution are related to the treatment resistance and disease progression in metastatic breast cancer (MBC). However, the process of clonal evolution and their relationship to prognosis remain unclear. This study aimed to elucidate the evolution of MBC through circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) analysis and to develop a novel indicator for predicting treatment efficacy and prognosis.
methodsThis multicenter retrospective study enrolled MBC patients who underwent next-generation sequencing between April 2016 and October 2022. The clonal evolution of tumors was inferred using PyClone and CITUP software.
resultsThe study included 406 MBC patients. A cohort of 139 patients from the National Cancer Center served as the training cohort, while 267 patients from other centers comprised the validation cohort. In the training cohort, clonal analysis revealed that most MBCs exhibited branched clonal evolution, while a minority showed linear evolution. The branched evolution pattern was associated with slower disease progression (HR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.32-0.87; P = 0.012). We introduced tumor clonal evolution rate (TER) as a novel concept to reflect the speed of clonal evolution. Survival analysis demonstrated that compared to the TER-high group, patients in the TER-low group had better progression-free survival (PFS) (HR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.40-0.96; P = 0.033) and overall survival (OS) (HR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.24-0.85; P = 0.013). Similarly, in the validation cohort, although the median OS was not reached, patients in the TER-low group had better prognosis compared to those in the TER-high group (HR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.21-0.83; P < 0.001).
conclusionsPatients with branched evolution have better treatment efficacy than those with linear evolution. The TER shows potential as a biomarker for treatment efficacy and prognosis, providing new evidence that ctDNA is a valuable molecular indicator for predicting treatment outcomes in metastatic breast cancer.
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.