Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 381

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 53 of the 53 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Comparative Genomic Analysis of Esophageal Adenocarcinoma and Squamous Cell Carcinoma

Open access
Agrawal, Nishant, Jiao, Yuchen, Bettegowda, Chetan, Hutfless, Susan M., Wang, Yuxuan, David, Stefan, Cheng, Yulan, Twaddell, William S., Latt, Nyan L., Shin, Eun J., Wang, Li-Dong, Wang, Liang, Yang, Wancai, Velculescu, Victor E., Vogelstein, Bert, Papadopoulos, Nickolas, Kinzler, Kenneth W., Meltzer, Stephen J.·2012·Cancer Discovery

Abstract

Esophageal cancer ranks sixth in cancer death. To explore its genetic origins, we conducted exomic sequencing on 11 esophageal adenocarcinomas (EAC) and 12 esophageal squamous cell carcinomas (ESCC) from the United States. Interestingly, inactivating mutations of NOTCH1 were identified in 21% of ESCCs but not in EACs. There was a substantial disparity in the spectrum of mutations, with more indels in ESCCs, A:T>C:G transversions in EACs, and C:G>G:C transversions in ESCCs (P < 0.0001). Notably, NOTCH1 mutations were more frequent in North American ESCCs (11 of 53 cases) than in ESCCs from China (1 of 48 cases). A parallel analysis found that most mutations in EACs were already present in matched Barrett esophagus. These discoveries highlight key genetic differences between EACs and ESCCs and between American and Chinese ESCCs, and suggest that NOTCH1 is a tumor suppressor gene in the esophagus. Finally, we provide a genetic basis for the evolution of EACs from Barrett esophagus. Significance: This is the first genome-wide study of mutations in esophageal cancer. It identifies key genetic differences between EACs and ESCCs including general mutation spectra and NOTCH1 loss-of-function mutations specific to ESCCs, shows geographic disparities between North American and Chinese ESCCs, and shows that most mutations in EACs are already present in matched Barrett esophagus. Cancer Discov; 2(10); 899–905. ©2012 AACR. Read the Commentary on this article by Collisson and Cho, p. 870. This article is highlighted in the In This Issue feature, p. 857.

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 · 10.1158/2159-8290.cd-12-0189

Cites

53 of 53 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 53 references

Cited by

See all 381

Metadata

Authors
Agrawal, N., Jiao, Y., Bettegowda, C., Hutfless, S. M., Wang, Y., David, S., Cheng, Y., Twaddell, W. S., Latt, N. L., Shin, E. J., Wang, L.-D., Wang, L., Yang, W., Velculescu, V. E., Vogelstein, B., Papadopoulos, N., Kinzler, K. W., & Meltzer, S. J.
Venue
Cancer Discovery
Published
2012-10-01
Volume
2
Issue
10
Pages
899-905
ISSN
  • 2159-8274 (ISSN-L)
  • 2159-8290
OpenAlex
W2114715773
Cited by
381
References
53
FWCI
32.47
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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: Comparative Genomic Analysis of Esophageal Adenocarcinoma and Squamous Cell Carcinoma. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1158/2159-8290.cd-12-0189
The paper
Agrawal, N., Jiao, Y., Bettegowda, C., Hutfless, S. M., Wang, Y., David, S., Cheng, Y., Twaddell, W. S., Latt, N. L., Shin, E. J., Wang, L.-D., Wang, L., Yang, W., Velculescu, V. E., Vogelstein, B., Papadopoulos, N., Kinzler, K. W., & Meltzer, S. J. (2012). Comparative Genomic Analysis of Esophageal Adenocarcinoma and Squamous Cell Carcinoma. Cancer Discovery. https://doi.org/10.1158/2159-8290.cd-12-0189

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.