Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 423

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 188 of the 188 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Classifying the evolutionary and ecological features of neoplasms

Open access
Maley, Carlo C., Aktipis, Athena, Graham, Trevor A., Sottoriva, Andrea, Boddy, Amy M., Janiszewska, Michalina, Silva, Ariosto S., Gerlinger, Marco, Yuan, Yinyin, Pienta, Kenneth J., Anderson, Karen S., Gatenby, Robert, Swanton, Charles, Posada, David, Wu, Chung-I, Schiffman, Joshua D., Hwang, E. Shelley, Polyak, Kornelia, Anderson, Alexander R. A., Brown, Joel S., Greaves, Mel, Shibata, Darryl·2017·Nature Reviews Cancer

Abstract

Neoplasms change over time through a process of cell-level evolution, driven by genetic and epigenetic alterations. However, the ecology of the microenvironment of a neoplastic cell determines which changes provide adaptive benefits. There is widespread recognition of the importance of these evolutionary and ecological processes in cancer, but to date, no system has been proposed for drawing clinically relevant distinctions between how different tumours are evolving. On the basis of a consensus conference of experts in the fields of cancer evolution and cancer ecology, we propose a framework for classifying tumours that is based on four relevant components. These are the diversity of neoplastic cells (intratumoural heterogeneity) and changes over time in that diversity, which make up an evolutionary index (Evo-index), as well as the hazards to neoplastic cell survival and the resources available to neoplastic cells, which make up an ecological index (Eco-index). We review evidence demonstrating the importance of each of these factors and describe multiple methods that can be used to measure them. Development of this classification system holds promise for enabling clinicians to personalize optimal interventions based on the evolvability of the patient's tumour. The Evo- and Eco-indices provide a common lexicon for communicating about how neoplasms change in response to interventions, with potential implications for clinical trials, personalized medicine and basic cancer research.

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/nrc.2017.69

Cites

188 of 188 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

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

Show all 188 references

Cited by

See all 423

Metadata

Authors
Maley, C. C., Aktipis, A., Graham, T. A., Sottoriva, A., Boddy, A. M., Janiszewska, M., Silva, A. S., Gerlinger, M., Yuan, Y., Pienta, K. J., Anderson, K. S., Gatenby, R., Swanton, C., Posada, D., Wu, C.-I., Schiffman, J. D., Hwang, E. S., Polyak, K., Anderson, A. R. A., Brown, J. S., Greaves, M., & Shibata, D.
Venue
Nature Reviews Cancer
Published
2017-09-15
Volume
17
Issue
10
Pages
605-619
ISSN
  • 1474-175X (ISSN-L)
  • 1474-1768
OpenAlex
W2753965489
Cited by
423
References
188
FWCI
4.44
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Classifying the evolutionary and ecological features of neoplasms. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1038/nrc.2017.69
The paper
Maley, C. C., Aktipis, A., Graham, T. A., Sottoriva, A., Boddy, A. M., Janiszewska, M., Silva, A. S., Gerlinger, M., Yuan, Y., Pienta, K. J., Anderson, K. S., Gatenby, R., Swanton, C., Posada, D., Wu, C.-I., Schiffman, J. D., Hwang, E. S., Polyak, K., Anderson, A. R. A., . . . Shibata, D. (2017). Classifying the evolutionary and ecological features of neoplasms. Nature Reviews Cancer. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrc.2017.69

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.