Intratumor Heterogeneity and Circulating Tumor Cell Clusters
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Genetic diversity plays a central role in tumor progression, metastasis, and resistance to treatment. Experiments are shedding light on this diversity at ever finer scales, but interpretation is challenging. Using recent progress in numerical models, we simulate macroscopic tumors to investigate the interplay between growth dynamics, microscopic composition, and circulating tumor cell cluster diversity. We find that modest differences in growth parameters can profoundly change microscopic diversity. Simple outwards expansion leads to spatially segregated clones and low diversity, as expected. However, a modest cell turnover can result in an increased number of divisions and mixing among clones resulting in increased microscopic diversity in the tumor core. Using simulations to estimate power to detect such spatial trends, we find that multiregion sequencing data from contemporary studies is marginally powered to detect the predicted effects. Slightly larger samples, improved detection of rare variants, or sequencing of smaller biopsies or circulating tumor cell clusters would allow one to distinguish between leading models of tumor evolution. The genetic composition of circulating tumor cell clusters, which can be obtained from non-invasive blood draws, is therefore informative about tumor evolution and its metastatic potential.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".