ArticleQuantitative biology (Beijing, China)2019
Algorithmic approaches to clonal reconstruction in heterogeneous cell populations.
Article in Quantitative biology (Beijing, China), 2019. 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, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- A statistical approach for tracking clonal dynamics in cancer using longitudinal next-generation sequencing data.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2021Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe reconstruction of clonal haplotypes and their evolutionary history in evolving populations is a common problem in both microbial evolutionary biology and cancer biology. The clonal theory of evolution provides a theoretical framework for modeling the evolution of clones.
resultsIn this paper, we review the theoretical framework and assumptions over which the clonal reconstruction problem is formulated. We formally define the problem and then discuss the complexity and solution space of the problem. Various methods have been proposed to find the phylogeny that best explains the observed data. We categorize these methods based on the type of input data that they use (space-resolved or time-resolved), and also based on their computational formulation as either combinatorial or probabilistic. It is crucial to understand the different types of input data because each provides essential but distinct information for drastically reducing the solution space of the clonal reconstruction problem. Complementary information provided by single cell sequencing or from whole genome sequencing of randomly isolated clones can also improve the accuracy of clonal reconstruction. We briefly review the existing algorithms and their relationships. Finally we summarize the tools that are developed for either directly solving the clonal reconstruction problem or a related computational problem.
conclusionsIn this review, we discuss the various formulations of the problem of inferring the clonal evolutionary history from allele frequeny data, review existing algorithms and catergorize them according to their problem formulation and solution approaches. We note that most of the available clonal inference algorithms were developed for elucidating tumor evolution whereas clonal reconstruction for unicellular genomes are less addressed. We conclude the review by discussing more open problems such as the lack of benchmark datasets and comparison of performance between available tools.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.