Independent Experimental Correspondence with Pre-Existing Distinctions in the Architectural Persistence State Recovery Framework: An ecDNA Evidence Audit

This research note evaluates whether subsequently published independent experimental evidence concerning extrachromosomal DNA (ecDNA) corresponds with distinctions documented in the Architectural Persistence State Recovery (APSR) framework before the correspondence analysis was performed. Eight pre-existing APSR statements were compared with ten source-only observations from an independent 2026 ecDNA study using a prospectively defined, frozen correspondence audit. Twenty evidence-to-statement mappings were classified as direct correspondence, partial correspondence, or no correspondence. The resulting matrix contained 3 direct, 10 partial, and 7 no-correspondence mappings; these are correspondence counts, not validation counts. The strongest correspondence concerned the distinction between structural state, state maintenance, functional consequence, fitness, and experimental context. In particular, reduction of ecDNA did not impair baseline proliferation, cell-cycle progression, or competitive fitness under the tested conditions, whereas fitness consequences emerged under defined ecDNA-dependent selective pressure. The analysis does not establish validation of APSR as a whole, does not resolve the stringent APSR Q2-T tissue-state criterion, and does not imply that APSR predicted ecDNA, Pol-theta, MMEJ, FANCM, ERCC1-ERCC4, TA-repeat fragility, or the specific molecular mechanism reported in the independent study. The appropriate disposition is meaningful but bounded independent correspondence.