Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 246

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Intraclonal heterogeneity and distinct molecular mechanisms characterize the development of t(4;14) and t(11;14) myeloma

Walker, Brian A., Wardell, Christopher P., Melchor, Lorenzo, Hulkki, Sanna, Potter, Nicola E., Johnson, David C., Fenwick, Kerry, Kozarewa, Iwanka, Gonzalez, David, Lord, Christopher J., Ashworth, Alan, Davies, Faith E., Morgan, Gareth J.·2012·Blood

Abstract

We have used whole exome sequencing to compare a group of presentation t(4;14) with t(11;14) cases of myeloma to define the mutational landscape. Each case was characterized by a median of 24.5 exonic nonsynonymous single-nucleotide variations, and there was a consistently higher number of mutations in the t(4;14) group, but this number did not reach statistical significance. We show that the transition and transversion rates in the 2 subgroups are similar, suggesting that there was no specific mechanism leading to mutation differentiating the 2 groups. Only 3% of mutations were seen in both groups, and recurrently mutated genes include NRAS, KRAS, BRAF, and DIS3 as well as DNAH5, a member of the axonemal dynein family. The pattern of mutation in each group was distinct, with the t(4;14) group being characterized by deregulation of chromatin organization, actin filament, and microfilament movement. Recurrent RAS pathway mutations identified subclonal heterogeneity at a mutational level in both groups, with mutations being present as either dominant or minor subclones. The presence of subclonal diversity was confirmed at a single-cell level using other tumor-acquired mutations. These results are consistent with a distinct molecular pathogenesis underlying each subgroup and have important impacts on targeted treatment strategies. The Medical Research Council Myeloma IX trial is registered under ISRCTN68454111.

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 · 10.1182/blood-2012-03-412981

Cites

3 of 3 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 3 references

Cited by

See all 246

Metadata

Authors
Walker, B. A., Wardell, C. P., Melchor, L., Hulkki, S., Potter, N. E., Johnson, D. C., Fenwick, K., Kozarewa, I., Gonzalez, D., Lord, C. J., Ashworth, A., Davies, F. E., & Morgan, G. J.
Venue
Blood
Published
2012-08-02
Volume
120
Issue
5
Pages
1077-1086
ISSN
  • 0006-4971 (ISSN-L)
  • 1528-0020
OpenAlex
W2006680755
Cited by
246
References
3
FWCI
21.13
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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: Intraclonal heterogeneity and distinct molecular mechanisms characterize the development of t(4;14) and t(11;14) myeloma. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1182/blood-2012-03-412981
The paper
Walker, B. A., Wardell, C. P., Melchor, L., Hulkki, S., Potter, N. E., Johnson, D. C., Fenwick, K., Kozarewa, I., Gonzalez, D., Lord, C. J., Ashworth, A., Davies, F. E., & Morgan, G. J. (2012). Intraclonal heterogeneity and distinct molecular mechanisms characterize the development of t(4;14) and t(11;14) myeloma. Blood. https://doi.org/10.1182/blood-2012-03-412981

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.