Intraline genomic heterogeneity of the triple-negative breast cancer MDA-MB-231 cell line

preprint OA: closed
📄 Open PDF Full text JSON View at publisher
AI-generated deep summary by claude@2026-07, 2026-07-06 · read from full text

This paper studied genomic evolution and variability within the widely used triple-negative breast cancer cell line MDA-MB-231 by analyzing sublines from different sources and at multiple time points/passage levels, using a detailed genomic profiling approach. The authors found extensive intraline heterogeneity, including substantial differences in single nucleotide variants and especially pronounced heterogeneity in copy number alterations, with notable chromosomal gains and losses among sublines, suggesting ongoing genomic instability during culture. A key caveat is that the observed variability reflects changes that can occur in cell culture, which may compromise reproducibility if subline passage and genomic characterization are not tracked. The paper does not explicitly discuss endometriosis or adenomyosis; it was included in the corpus via a keyword match in the upstream search index.

Read from the paper's body, not the abstract. Not a substitute for reading the paper. No clinical advice. How this works

Abstract

SUMMARY Cancer cell lines are valuable models for studying tumor biology, yet their genomic evolution during culture can compromise experimental reproducibility. We conducted a detailed genomic analysis of the triple-negative breast cancer cell line MDA-MB-231, examining sublines obtained from different sources, at various time points, and across distinct passages. We introduce the concept of intraline heterogeneity (ILH) to highlight the genomic variability observed among these sublines. Our analyses revealed extensive genomic diversity, including differences in single nucleotide variants (SNVs) and copy number alterations (CNAs). In particular, CNAs exhibited remarkable heterogeneity, with pronounced chromosomal gains and losses between sublines, underscoring the impact of genomic instability on ILH. These findings suggest that ILH may influence experimental outcomes, emphasizing the importance of considering passage-specific genomic characterization to ensure consistency and reliability in cancer research.
Full text 1,102 characters · extracted from oa-doi-fallback · click to expand
SUMMARY Cancer cell lines are valuable models for studying tumor biology, yet their genomic evolution during culture can compromise experimental reproducibility. We conducted a detailed genomic analysis of the triple-negative breast cancer cell line MDA-MB-231, examining sublines obtained from different sources, at various time points, and across distinct passages. We introduce the concept of intraline heterogeneity (ILH) to highlight the genomic variability observed among these sublines. Our analyses revealed extensive genomic diversity, including differences in single nucleotide variants (SNVs) and copy number alterations (CNAs). In particular, CNAs exhibited remarkable heterogeneity, with pronounced chromosomal gains and losses between sublines, underscoring the impact of genomic instability on ILH. These findings suggest that ILH may influence experimental outcomes, emphasizing the importance of considering passage-specific genomic characterization to ensure consistency and reliability in cancer research. Competing Interest Statement The authors have declared no competing interest.

Text is read by the "Ask this paper" AI Q&A widget below. Extraction quality varies by source — PMC NXML preserves structure cleanly, OA-HTML may include some navigation residue, and OA-PDF can have broken hyphenation. The publisher copy (via DOI) is the canonical version.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

Ask this paper AI returns verbatim quotes from the full text · source: oa-doi-fallback

Answers must be backed by verbatim quotes from this paper's full text. Hallucinated quotes are dropped automatically; if no verbatim passage answers the question, we say so. How this works

Citation neighborhood (no data yet)

We don't have any in-corpus citations linked to this paper yet. This is a recent paper (2025) — citers typically take a year or two to land, and the OpenAlex reference graph may still be filling in.

Source provenance

europepmc
last seen: 2026-05-20T01:45:00.602351+00:00