Revealing the Drivers Underlying Distinct Evolutionary Trajectories in Lung Adenocarcinoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Elucidating the evolution of cancers allows us to understand their key events, and the order in which they occur. To chart and interpret these evolutionary trajectories, we leverage whole-genome sequencing of lung tumours, including those from the largest cohort to date of lung cancers in subjects who have never smoked. Through ordering frequent genomic alterations, we discover three distinct evolutionary paths taken by lung adenocarcinomas; two dominated by tumours from people who have never smoked (NS-LUAD), and one followed by the vast majority of those who have smoked (S-LUAD). However, one in six NS-LUAD follow the smoking-dominant trajectory. These tumours, surprisingly, have fewer somatic alterations than the other NS-LUAD, and have shorter latency. They are strongly enriched for KRAS mutations. Our results suggest that gaining KRAS mutations allows these tumours to evolve more rapidly, acquiring a set of smoking-associated key alterations, with less need for genomic instability to progress. These tumours are three times more frequent in subjects of European vs. East Asian ancestry. These findings could shape clinical management strategies for lung adenocarcinoma patients, particularly for tumours driven by smoking-like evolutionary trajectories.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".