↓ Skip to main content

Somatic clonal evolution: A selection-centric perspective

Overview of attention for article published in BBA - Reviews on Cancer, February 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • One of the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#8 of 520)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (86th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
37 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
65 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
121 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
Somatic clonal evolution: A selection-centric perspective
Published in
BBA - Reviews on Cancer, February 2017
DOI 10.1016/j.bbcan.2017.01.006
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jacob Scott, Andriy Marusyk

Abstract

It is generally accepted that the initiation and progression of cancers is the result of somatic clonal evolution. Despite many peculiarities, evolution within populations of somatic cells should obey the same Darwinian principles as evolution within natural populations, i.e. variability of heritable phenotypes provides the substrate for context-specific selection forces leading to increased population frequencies of phenotypes, which are better adapted to their environment. Yet, within cancer biology, the more prevalent way to view evolution is as being entirely driven by the accumulation of "driver" mutations. Context-specific selection forces are either ignored, or viewed as constraints from which tumor cells liberate themselves during the course of malignant progression. In this review, we will argue that explicitly focusing on selection forces acting on the populations of neoplastic cells as the driving force of somatic clonal evolution might provide for a more accurate conceptual framework compared to the mutation-centric driver gene paradigm. Whereas little can be done to counteract the "bad luck" of stochastic occurrences of cancer-related mutations, changes in selective pressures and the phenotypic adaptations they induce can, in principle, be exploited to limit the incidence of cancers and to increase the efficiency of existing and future therapies. This article is part of a Special Issue entitled: Evolutionary principles - heterogeneity in cancer?, edited by Dr. Robert A. Gatenby.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 37 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 121 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 2%
United States 2 2%
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 116 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 25 21%
Researcher 25 21%
Student > Master 15 12%
Student > Bachelor 7 6%
Other 6 5%
Other 16 13%
Unknown 27 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 28 23%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 28 23%
Medicine and Dentistry 15 12%
Mathematics 4 3%
Philosophy 3 2%
Other 17 14%
Unknown 26 21%
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 15 March 2022.
All research outputs
#1,433,724
of 25,461,852 outputs
Outputs from BBA - Reviews on Cancer
#8
of 520 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#30,005
of 425,097 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BBA - Reviews on Cancer
#2
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,461,852 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 520 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 425,097 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 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.