Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 497

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Tracking the clonal origin of lethal prostate cancer

Open access
Haffner, Michael C., Mosbruger, Timothy, Esopi, David M., Fedor, Helen, Heaphy, Christopher M., Walker, David A., Adejola, Nkosi, Gürel, Meltem, Hicks, Jessica, Meeker, Alan K., Halushka, Marc K., Simons, Jonathan W., Isaacs, William B., De Marzo, Angelo M., Nelson, William G., Yegnasubramanian, Srinivasan·2013·Journal of Clinical Investigation

Abstract

Recent controversies surrounding prostate cancer overtreatment emphasize the critical need to delineate the molecular features associated with progression to lethal metastatic disease. Here, we have used whole-genome sequencing and molecular pathological analyses to characterize the lethal cell clone in a patient who died of prostate cancer. We tracked the evolution of the lethal cell clone from the primary cancer to metastases through samples collected during disease progression and at the time of death. Surprisingly, these analyses revealed that the lethal clone arose from a small, relatively low-grade cancer focus in the primary tumor, and not from the bulk, higher-grade primary cancer or from a lymph node metastasis resected at prostatectomy. Despite being limited to one case, these findings highlight the potential importance of developing and implementing molecular prognostic and predictive markers, such as alterations of tumor suppressor proteins PTEN or p53, to augment current pathological evaluation and delineate clonal heterogeneity. Furthermore, this case illustrates the potential need in precision medicine to longitudinally sample metastatic lesions to capture the evolving constellation of alterations during progression. Similar comprehensive studies of additional prostate cancer cases are warranted to understand the extent to which these issues may challenge prostate cancer clinical management.

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 · 10.1172/jci70354

Cites

8 of 8 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 8 references

Cited by

See all 497

Metadata

Authors
Haffner, M. C., Mosbruger, T., Esopi, D. M., Fedor, H., Heaphy, C. M., Walker, D. A., Adejola, N., Gürel, M., Hicks, J., Meeker, A. K., Halushka, M. K., Simons, J. W., Isaacs, W. B., De Marzo, A. M., Nelson, W. G., & Yegnasubramanian, S.
Venue
Journal of Clinical Investigation
Published
2013-10-25
Volume
123
Issue
11
Pages
4918-4922
ISSN
0021-9738 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2020276643
Cited by
497
References
8
FWCI
47.50
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: Tracking the clonal origin of lethal prostate cancer. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1172/jci70354
The paper
Haffner, M. C., Mosbruger, T., Esopi, D. M., Fedor, H., Heaphy, C. M., Walker, D. A., Adejola, N., Gürel, M., Hicks, J., Meeker, A. K., Halushka, M. K., Simons, J. W., Isaacs, W. B., De Marzo, A. M., Nelson, W. G., & Yegnasubramanian, S. (2013). Tracking the clonal origin of lethal prostate cancer. Journal of Clinical Investigation. https://doi.org/10.1172/jci70354

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.