Patterns of somatic structural variation in human cancer genomes

By Yilong Li, Nicola D. Roberts, J. Wala, Ofer Shapira, S. Schumacher, Kiran H. Kumar, E. Khurana, S. Waszak, Jan O. Korbel, James E. Haber and 4 more. Nature, 2020

719 citations recorded by the source corpus.

A key mutational process in cancer is structural variation, in which rearrangements delete, amplify or reorder genomic segments that range in size from kilobases to whole chromosomes1–7. Here we develop methods to group, classify and describe somatic structural variants, using data from the Pan-Cancer Analysis of Whole Genomes (PCAWG) Consortium of the International Cancer Genome Consortium (ICGC) and The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA), which aggregated whole-genome sequencing data from 2,658 cancers across 38 tumour types8. Sixteen signatures of structural variation emerged. Deletions have a multimodal size distribution, assort unevenly across tumour types and patients, are enriched in late-replicating regions and correlate with inversions. Tandem duplications also have a multimodal size distribution, but are enriched in early-replicating regions—as are unbalanced translocations. Replication-based mechanisms of rearrangement generate varied chromosomal structures with low-level copy-number gains and frequent inverted rearrangements. One prominent structure consists of 2–7 templates copied from distinct regions of the genome strung together within one locus. Such cycles of templated insertions correlate with tandem duplications, and—in liver cancer—frequently activate the telomerase gene TERT. A wide variety of rearrangement processes are active in cancer, which generate complex configurations of the genome upon which selection can act. Whole-genome sequencing data from more than 2,500 cancers of 38 tumour types reveal 16 signatures that can be used to classify somatic structural variants, highlighting the diversity of genomic rearrangements in cancer.

Subfields: Cancer Research, Genetics, Pathology and Forensic Medicine

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/af7ecf06fb8c200dead6bda5d3f9590de5259fee

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Cancer Research

  1. Matthew Meyerson
  2. Oliver Stegle
  3. Chad Creighton
  4. Jakob Skou Pedersen

In Genetics

  1. P. Park
  2. Oliver Stegle
  3. Alvis Brazma
  4. Roland F. Schwarz
  5. Zemin Zhang

Citations in the corpus