| Title |
Clonal evolution in myelodysplastic syndromes
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Nature Communications, April 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1038/ncomms15099 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Pedro da Silva-Coelho, Leonie I. Kroeze, Kenichi Yoshida, Theresia N. Koorenhof-Scheele, Ruth Knops, Louis T. van de Locht, Aniek O. de Graaf, Marion Massop, Sarah Sandmann, Martin Dugas, Marian J. Stevens-Kroef, Jaroslav Cermak, Yuichi Shiraishi, Kenichi Chiba, Hiroko Tanaka, Satoru Miyano, Theo de Witte, Nicole M. A. Blijlevens, Petra Muus, Gerwin Huls, Bert A. van der Reijden, Seishi Ogawa, Joop H. Jansen |
| Abstract |
Cancer development is a dynamic process during which the successive accumulation of mutations results in cells with increasingly malignant characteristics. Here, we show the clonal evolution pattern in myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) patients receiving supportive care, with or without lenalidomide (follow-up 2.5-11 years). Whole-exome and targeted deep sequencing at multiple time points during the disease course reveals that both linear and branched evolutionary patterns occur with and without disease-modifying treatment. The application of disease-modifying therapy may create an evolutionary bottleneck after which more complex MDS, but also unrelated clones of haematopoietic cells, may emerge. In addition, subclones that acquired an additional mutation associated with treatment resistance (TP53) or disease progression (NRAS, KRAS) may be detected months before clinical changes become apparent. Monitoring the genetic landscape during the disease may help to guide treatment decisions. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 10% |
| Portugal | 1 | 10% |
| Unknown | 8 | 80% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 9 | 90% |
| Scientists | 1 | 10% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 135 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 134 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 28 | 21% |
| Researcher | 21 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 18 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 14 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 8 | 6% |
| Other | 15 | 11% |
| Unknown | 31 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 34 | 25% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 34 | 25% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 17 | 13% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 2% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 2 | 1% |
| Other | 12 | 9% |
| Unknown | 33 | 24% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 07 April 2024.
All research outputs
#4,666,748
of 23,577,654 outputs
Outputs from Nature Communications
#33,256
of 49,108 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#80,642
of 311,078 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature Communications
#681
of 959 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,654 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 49,108 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 56.2. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 311,078 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 959 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.