4 ms·
My (weak) understanding is that the functional impact of a mutation is more important than the type of variations. Otherwise we would see recurrent point mutati
by xyhopguy 9y ago
My (weak) understanding is that the functional impact of a mutation is more important than the type of variations. Otherwise we would see recurrent point mutations rather than hotspots right?
FWIW though, people have already been able to predict treatment outcome from mutation profile. Turns out the hard part is picking up on mutations present in only a tiny subset of the tumor.
- sungam 9y agoWe do see recurrent point mutations as well as recurrently mutated pathways.
- nonbel 9y agoI was thinking about Peter Duesberg. He has been really pushing the aneuploidy idea for a few decades now, but everyone ignores him since he is a "denier": http://www.newsweek.com/can-hiv-denying-scientist-cure-cancer-81157 http://www.newsweek.com/can-hiv-denying-scientist-cure-cance... It'd be pretty funny if he turned out to be correct.
- xyhopguy 9y agoI don't really know any history about cancer research, but as long as I've been in genomics people have talked about it. Difficulty is actually finding CNVs. These days it's not so hard. It's also important to remember that we know some cancers (leukemia for instance) are diploid and rarely develop anueploidy.