Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42717056›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Cancer2026

A guide to understanding tumour evolution through the lens of population genetics.

Giulio Caravagna, Trevor A Graham, Andrea Sottoriva

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Cancer, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors.

Giulio CaravagnaDepartment of Mathematics, Informatics and Geosciences, University of Trieste, Trieste, Italy. giulio.caravagna@units.it.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4240-3265
Trevor A GrahamCentre for Evolution and Cancer, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK. trevor.graham@icr.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9582-1597
Andrea SottorivaComputational Biology Research Centre, Human Technopole, Milan, Italy. andrea.sottoriva@fht.org.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6709-9533

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Every cancer carries the history of its own evolution, hidden in its genome. Modern DNA sequencing can catalogue millions of mutations and profile tumours across space and time, but sequencing alone struggles to answer the questions that matter most: when did key adaptations emerge, how strongly were they selected, why do some tumours relapse whereas others do not, and how will the cancer evolve next? The reason is fundamental: sequencing is a snapshot, whereas evolution is a dynamic process. Bridging this gap requires moving beyond descriptive cancer genomics towards quantitative evolutionary inference. In this Review, we argue that population genetics provides the mathematical framework needed to extract evolutionary dynamics from cancer genomes. We show how models of mutation, selection and drift transform allele frequencies from descriptive measurements into quantitative estimates of clonal fitness and evolutionary timings. We discuss how these principles extend to epigenetic inheritance, plasticity and ecological interactions within the tumour ecosystem, and examine the assumptions and limitations for their application to modern sequencing data. By reframing cancer genomes as quantitative records of evolutionary processes rather than catalogues of mutations, researchers have used population genetics to provide a foundation for understanding - and ultimately predicting - the trajectories of cancer evolution.

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.