Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 258

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 49 of the 49 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Genomic analysis of hepatoblastoma identifies distinct molecular and prognostic subgroups

Open access
Sumazin, Pavel, Chen, Yidong, Treviño, Lisa R., Sarabia, Stephen F., Hampton, Oliver A., Patel, Kayuri, Mistretta, Toni‐Ann, Zorman, Barry, Thompson, Patrick, Heczey, Andras, Comerford, Sarah, Wheeler, David A., Chintagumpala, Murali, Meyers, Rebecka, Rakheja, Dinesh, Finegold, Milton J., Tomlinson, Gail, Parsons, D. Williams, López‐Terrada, Dolores·2017·Hepatology

Abstract

Despite being the most common liver cancer in children, hepatoblastoma (HB) is a rare neoplasm. Consequently, few pretreatment tumors have been molecularly profiled, and there are no validated prognostic or therapeutic biomarkers for HB patients. We report on the first large-scale effort to profile pretreatment HBs at diagnosis. Our analysis of 88 clinically annotated HBs revealed three risk-stratifying molecular subtypes that are characterized by differential activation of hepatic progenitor cell markers and metabolic pathways: high-risk tumors were characterized by up-regulated nuclear factor, erythroid 2-like 2 activity; high lin-28 homolog B, high mobility group AT-hook 2, spalt-like transcription factor 4, and alpha-fetoprotein expression; and high coordinated expression of oncofetal proteins and stem-cell markers, while low-risk tumors had low lin-28 homolog B and lethal-7 expression and high hepatic nuclear factor 1 alpha activity. CONCLUSION: Analysis of immunohistochemical assays using antibodies targeting these genes in a prospective study of 35 HBs suggested that these candidate biomarkers have the potential to improve risk stratification and guide treatment decisions for HB patients at diagnosis; our results pave the way for clinical collaborative studies to validate candidate biomarkers and test their potential to improve outcome for HB patients. (Hepatology 2017;65:104-121).

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/hep.28888

Cites

49 of 49 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 49 references

Cited by

See all 258

Metadata

Authors
Sumazin, P., Chen, Y., Treviño, L. R., Sarabia, S. F., Hampton, O. A., Patel, K., Mistretta, T., Zorman, B., Thompson, P., Heczey, A., Comerford, S., Wheeler, D. A., Chintagumpala, M., Meyers, R., Rakheja, D., Finegold, M. J., Tomlinson, G., Parsons, D. W., & López‐Terrada, D.
Venue
Hepatology
Published
2017-01
Volume
65
Issue
1
Pages
104-121
ISSN
0270-9139 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2536314181
Cited by
258
References
49
FWCI
10.32
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Genomic analysis of hepatoblastoma identifies distinct molecular and prognostic subgroups. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/hep.28888
The paper
Sumazin, P., Chen, Y., Treviño, L. R., Sarabia, S. F., Hampton, O. A., Patel, K., Mistretta, T., Zorman, B., Thompson, P., Heczey, A., Comerford, S., Wheeler, D. A., Chintagumpala, M., Meyers, R., Rakheja, D., Finegold, M. J., Tomlinson, G., Parsons, D. W., & López‐Terrada, D. (2017). Genomic analysis of hepatoblastoma identifies distinct molecular and prognostic subgroups. Hepatology. https://doi.org/10.1002/hep.28888

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.