Reconstructing Complex Cancer Evolutionary Histories from Multiple Bulk DNA Samples
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cancers are composed of genetically distinct subpopulations of malignant cells. By sequencing DNA from cancer tissue samples, we can characterize the somatic mutations specific to each population and build clone trees describing the evolutionary relationships between these populations. These trees reveal critical points in disease development and inform treatment. This thesis describes Pairtree, which is a new method for constructing clone trees using DNA sequencing data from one or more bulk samples of an individual cancer. It uses Bayesian inference to compute posterior distributions over the evolutionary relationships between every pair of identified subpopulations, then uses these distributions in a Markov Chain Monte Carlo algorithm to perform efficient inference of the posterior distribution over clone trees. Pairtree also uses the pairwise relationships to detect mutations that violate the infinite sites assumption. Unlike previous methods, Pairtree can perform clone tree reconstructions using as many as 100 samples per cancer that reveal 30 or more cell subpopulations. On simulated data, Pairtree is the only method whose performance reliably improves when provided with additional bulk samples from a cancer. On 14 B-progenitor acute lymphoblastic leukemias with up to 90 samples from each cancer, Pairtree was the only method that could reproduce or improve upon expert-derived clone tree reconstructions. Beyond describing Pairtree and evaluating it relative to previous methods, we develop extensions for profiling the degree of uncertainty that exists in its solution set, quantifying the degree of heterogeneity that occurs in different cancer samples, and deciding whether two cancer samples are genetically similar. By scaling to more challenging problems, Pairtree supports new biomedical research applications that can improve our understanding of the natural history of cancer, as well as better illustrate the interplay between cancer, host, and therapeutic interventions.
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 | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".