Although clonal selection by genetic driver aberrations in cancer is well documented, the ability of epigenetic alterations to promote tumor evolution is undefined. We used 450k arrays and next-generation sequencing to evaluate intratumor heterogeneity and evolution of DNA methylation and genetic aberrations in chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). CLL cases exhibit vast interpatient differences in intratumor methylation heterogeneity, with genetically clonal cases maintaining low methylation heterogeneity and up to 10% of total CpGs in a monoallelically methylated state. Increasing methylation heterogeneity correlates with advanced genetic subclonal complexity. Selection of novel DNA methylation patterns is observed only in cases that undergo genetic evolution, and independent genetic evolution is uncommon and is restricted to low-risk alterations. These results reveal that although evolution of DNA methylation occurs in high-risk, clinically progressive cases, positive selection of novel methylation patterns entails coevolution of genetic alteration(s) in CLL.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 October 2025.
All research outputs
#5,830,768
of 31,591,940 outputs
Outputs from Cancer Discovery
#1,621
of 4,498 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#47,733
of 252,732 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cancer Discovery
#14
of 50 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 31,591,940 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,498 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 24.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its peers.
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 252,732 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 50 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.
