Latency and interval therapy affect the evolution in metastatic colorectal cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
While comparison of primary tumor and metastases has highlighted genomic heterogeneity in colorectal cancer (CRC), previous studies have focused on a single metastatic site or limited genomic testing. Combining data from whole exome and ultra-deep targeted sequencing, we explored possible evolutionary trajectories beyond the status of these mutations, particularly among patient-matched metastatic tumors. Our findings confirm the persistence of known clinically-relevant mutations (e.g., those of RAS family of oncogenes) in CRC primary and metastases, yet reveal that latency and interval systemic therapy affect the course of evolutionary events within metastatic lesions. Specifically, our analysis of patient-matched primary and multiple metastatic lesions, developed over time, showed a similar genetic composition for liver metastatic tumors, which were 21-months apart. This genetic makeup was different from those identified in lung metastases developed before manifestation of the second liver metastasis. These results underscore the role of latency in the evolutionary path of metastatic CRC and may have implications for future treatment options.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".