↓ Skip to main content

Bayesian inference of negative and positive selection in human cancers

Overview of attention for article published in Nature Genetics, November 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (91st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
53 X users
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
93 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
213 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Bayesian inference of negative and positive selection in human cancers
Published in
Nature Genetics, November 2017
DOI 10.1038/ng.3987
Pubmed ID
Authors

Donate Weghorn, Shamil Sunyaev

Abstract

Cancer genomics efforts have identified genes and regulatory elements driving cancer development and neoplastic progression. From a microevolution standpoint, these are subject to positive selection. Although elusive in current studies, genes whose wild-type coding sequences are needed for tumor growth are also of key interest. They are expected to experience negative selection and stay intact under pressure of incessant mutation. The detection of significantly mutated (or undermutated) genes is completely confounded by the genomic heterogeneity of cancer mutation. Here we present a hierarchical framework that allows modeling of coding point mutations. Application of the model to sequencing data from 17 cancer types demonstrates an increased power to detect known cancer driver genes and identifies new significantly mutated genes with highly plausible biological functions. The signal of negative selection is very subtle, but is detectable in several cancer types and in a pan-cancer data set. It is enriched in cell-essential genes identified in a CRISPR screen, as well as in genes with reported roles in cancer.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 53 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 213 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 213 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 53 25%
Student > Ph. D. Student 51 24%
Student > Bachelor 19 9%
Student > Master 11 5%
Student > Postgraduate 10 5%
Other 34 16%
Unknown 35 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 63 30%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 55 26%
Medicine and Dentistry 21 10%
Computer Science 10 5%
Physics and Astronomy 5 2%
Other 19 9%
Unknown 40 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 27. 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 21 April 2021.
All research outputs
#1,417,253
of 25,405,598 outputs
Outputs from Nature Genetics
#2,121
of 7,579 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#28,902
of 342,413 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature Genetics
#40
of 56 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,405,598 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,579 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 43.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% 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 342,413 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 56 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.