CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 709Cancer Genomics and DiagnosticsGenomic variations and chromosomal abnormalitiesChromatin Remodeling and Cancer

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 40 of the 41 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Signatures of mutation and selection in the cancer genome

Open access
Bignell, Graham R., Greenman, Chris D., Davies, Helen, Butler, Adam P., Edkins, Sarah, Andrews, Jenny M., Buck, Gemma, Chen, Lina, Beare, David, Latimer, Calli, Widaa, Sara, Hinton, Jonathon, Fahey, Ciara, Fu, Beiyuan, Swamy, Sajani, Dalgliesh, Gillian L., Teh, Bin T., Deloukas, Panos, Yang, Fengtang, Campbell, Peter J., Futreal, P. Andrew, Stratton, Michael R.·2010·Nature
DOI 10.1038/nature08768PMC PMC3145113
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

The cancer genome is moulded by the dual processes of somatic mutation and selection. Homozygous deletions in cancer genomes occur over recessive cancer genes, where they can confer selective growth advantage, and over fragile sites, where they are thought to reflect an increased local rate of DNA breakage. However, most homozygous deletions in cancer genomes are unexplained. Here we identified 2,428 somatic homozygous deletions in 746 cancer cell lines. These overlie 11% of protein-coding genes that, therefore, are not mandatory for survival of human cells. We derived structural signatures that distinguish between homozygous deletions over recessive cancer genes and fragile sites. Application to clusters of unexplained homozygous deletions suggests that many are in regions of inherent fragility, whereas a small subset overlies recessive cancer genes. The results illustrate how structural signatures can be used to distinguish between the influences of mutation and selection in cancer genomes. The extensive copy number, genotyping, sequence and expression data available for this large series of publicly available cancer cell lines renders them informative reagents for future studies of cancer biology and drug discovery. Two Articles in this issue add major data sets to the growing picture of the cancer genome. Bignell et al. analysed a large number of homozygous gene deletions in a collection of 746 publicly available cancer cell lines. Combined with information about hemizygous deletions of the same genes, the data suggest that many deletions found in cancer reflect the position of a gene at a fragile site in the genome, rather than as a recessive cancer gene whose loss confers a selective growth advantage. Beroukhim et al. present the largest data set to date on somatic copy-number variations across more than 3,000 specimens of human primary cancers. Many alterations are shared between multiple tumour types. Functional experiments demonstrate an oncogenic role for the apoptosis genes MCL1 and BCL2L1 that are associated with amplifications found in many cancers. Homozygous gene deletions in cancer cells occur over recessive cancer genes (where they can confer selective growth advantage) or over genes at fragile sites of the genome (where they are thought to reflect increased DNA breakage). Here, a large number of homozygous deletions in a collection of cancer cell lines are identified and analysed to derive structural signatures for the two different types of deletion. More deletions are found in inherently fragile regions, and fewer overlying recessive genes.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/nature08768

Cites

40 of 40 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

1 retracted

Show all 41 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 501–600 of 709

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Bignell, G. R., Greenman, C. D., Davies, H., Butler, A. P., Edkins, S., Andrews, J. M., Buck, G., Chen, L., Beare, D., Latimer, C., Widaa, S., Hinton, J., Fahey, C., Fu, B., Swamy, S., Dalgliesh, G. L., Teh, B. T., Deloukas, P., Yang, F., Campbell, P. J., Futreal, P. A., & Stratton, M. R.
Affiliations
  • Wellcome Sanger Institute (GB)
  • Van Andel Institute (US)
  • Institute of Cancer Research (GB)
Corresponding author
  • Futreal, P. Andrew
  • Stratton, Michael R.
ORCID
Venue
Nature
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2010-02
Volume
463
Issue
7283
Pages
893-898
ISSN
  • 0028-0836 (ISSN-L)
  • 1476-4687
DOI
10.1038/nature08768
PMC
PMC3145113
OpenAlex
W2071734901
Cited by
707
References
41
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 24 · 2024: 21 · 2023: 29 · 2022: 25 · 2021: 32 · 2020: 40 · 2019: 30 · 2018: 44 · 2017: 44 · 2016: 47 · 2015: 48 · 2014: 61 · 2013: 71 · 2012: 76
FWCI
25.43
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Nature (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • UEA Digital Repository (University of East Anglia) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Wellcome Trust (077012/Z/05/Z, 088340, 093867)
  • National Cancer Institute (P01CA155258)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cancer Research › Cancer Genomics and Diagnostics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genomic variations and chromosomal abnormalities
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Chromatin Remodeling and Cancer
Keywords
fragile sites, copy number variation, cancer cell lines, structural signatures, DNA breakage, Mcl-1, Bcl-xL, gene amplification, tumor suppressor
MeSH terms
Chromosomes, Human, DNA Mutational Analysis, Genes, Recessive, Homozygote, Humans, Models, Genetic, Neoplasms, Selection, Genetic, Reproducibility of Results, Genome, Human, Gene Deletion, Gene Dosage, Physical Chromosome Mapping, Oligonucleotide Array Sequence Analysis, Chromosome Fragile Sites, Cell Line, Tumor, Genes, Neoplasm, DNA Copy Number Variations

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review