- Design
- Retrospective diagnostic accuracy study with validation cohort
- Population
- 120 paired GI, HPB and peritoneal tumours from 60 patients
- Primary outcome
- Discrimination of clonal from non-clonal pairs
- Effect
- AUROC 0.986 (0.962 to 1.0); sensitivity 96.2%, specificity 100% vs 71.2% and 62.5% for morphology
This study tested a clonal-relatedness index (CRI) — shared alterations divided by the average total alterations — on next-generation sequencing data from 120 paired gastrointestinal, hepatopancreaticobiliary and peritoneal tumours in 60 patients, 52 pairs known clonal and 8 non-clonal.
Median CRI was 0.85 in clonal and 0.24 in non-clonal pairs. It discriminated with AUROC 0.986 (95% CI 0.962 to 1.0), with an optimal cut-off of 0.53. CRI had sensitivity 96.2%, specificity 100% and positive predictive value 100%, against 71.2%, 62.5% and 92.5% for morphology and immunohistochemistry. In hypermutated tumours morphology fell to 42.9% sensitivity, while CRI held 85.7% sensitivity and 100% specificity. Performance held in a validation cohort.
The question — metastasis or second primary — directly changes staging and treatment. Many patients already have panel sequencing on both tumours, so the index can often be calculated from existing reports. The non-clonal group was small (8 pairs), so specificity is less certain than it looks.
- When both tumours have been sequenced, calculate shared over average total alterations; a value above about 0.5 favours clonal relatedness.
- Use sequencing rather than morphology alone when the tumours are hypermutated or mismatch-repair deficient.
- Report the basis for any metastasis-versus-second-primary opinion so oncologists can weigh it.
- Treat the 0.53 cut-off as provisional; only eight non-clonal pairs informed it.
Why it matters
Morphology misjudged clonality most often in exactly the hypermutated tumours where it matters.
Don't overread it
Only eight non-clonal pairs; the 100% specificity rests on few cases.
The statistics, in plain English
An AUROC of 0.986 means the index almost always ranked a clonal pair above a non-clonal one. Perfect specificity from eight non-clonal pairs could easily be lower in a larger series.
Read the rest in the app
You have read your two free briefings this month. The app carries all 27 specialties, every morning, free — and this finding is waiting in it.

Scan to keep reading on your phone. No account needed to start.
Tomorrow morning, before your first patient
One edition a day for pathology, written by the desk, every claim tied to its paper. Six minutes.
Get the app — free