ArticleCancer research2026
Comprehensive Genomic Analysis of Normal and Cancer Cells Elucidates the Elevated Mutational Burden in Cancer.
Article in Cancer research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Self-renewing normal tissues generate several somatic mutations at each division. Previous studies have reported that cancer cells have more mutations than their normal counterparts. It is not obvious why dramatic differences in mutational burdens between normal tissues and cancers should exist. To fully understand human tumorigenesis, the increase in mutational burden across cancers will have to be understood. In this study, we provided a systematic comparison of mutational burdens in normal and cancer cells from 5 different organs, revealing a 4-fold increase in mutational burden in cancerous versus noncancerous cells. Three proposed hypotheses could account for the increased mutational burdens in cancer: the classical hypothesis, in which driver gene mutations explain the higher mutational burden; the catastrophic hypothesis, in which extreme mutational events lead to large-scale genomic alterations; and the tail hypothesis, in which differences in baseline mutation rates among individuals account for the differences. Testing through orthogonal observations showed that the observed medians and distributions of mutational burdens in cancers could be explained by the hypotheses to various degrees of significance, and only the tail hypothesis could easily explain the increase in median mutational burdens in the normal tissues of patients with cancer compared with the normal tissues of noncancer patients. Overall, this study characterizes an increased mutational burden across multiple types of cancer compared with normal tissue and provides insights into the contributing factors. A tenable hypothesis proposed in this study involving fundamental differences in baseline mutation rates among individuals could have implications for cancer prevention strategies. SIGNIFICANCE: Comprehensive analysis of mutation burden distributions across normal and cancerous tissues reveals consistently higher burden in cancers, with a proposed explanation that may improve risk prediction and cancer prevention.
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.