Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 234

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

The molecular underpinning of lobular histological growth pattern: a genome‐wide transcriptomic analysis of invasive lobular carcinomas and grade‐ and molecular subtype‐matched invasive ductal carcinomas of no special type

Open access
Weigelt, Britta, Geyer, Felipe C, Natrajan, Rachael, Lopez‐Garcia, Maria A, Ahmad, Amar S, Savage, Kay, Kreike, Bas, Reis‐Filho, Jorge S·2010·The Journal of Pathology

Abstract

Invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC) is the most frequent special type of breast cancer. The majority of these tumours are of low histological grade, express hormone receptors, and lack HER2 expression. The pleomorphic variant of ILCs (PLCs) is characterized by atypical cells with pleomorphic nuclei and is reported to have an aggressive clinical behaviour. Expression profiling studies have demonstrated that classic ILCs preferentially display a luminal phenotype, whereas PLCs may be of luminal, HER2 or molecular apocrine subtypes. The aims of this study were two‐fold: to determine the transcriptomic characteristics of lobular carcinomas and to define the genome‐wide transcriptomic differences between classic ILCs and PLCs. To define the transcriptomic characteristics of ILCs, minimizing the impact of histological grade and molecular subtype on the analysis, we subjected a series of grade‐ and molecular subtype‐matched ILCs and invasive ductal carcinomas (IDCs) to genome‐wide gene expression profiling using oligonucleotide microarrays. Hierarchical clustering analysis demonstrated that ILCs formed a separate cluster and a supervised analysis revealed that 5.8% of the transcriptionally regulated genes were significantly differentially expressed in ILCs compared to grade‐ and molecular subtype‐matched IDCs. ILCs displayed down‐regulation of E‐cadherin and of genes related to actin cytoskeleton remodelling, protein ubiquitin, DNA repair, cell adhesion, TGF‐beta signalling; and up‐regulation of transcription factors/immediate early genes, lipid/prostaglandin biosynthesis genes, and cell migration‐associated genes. Supervised analysis of classic ILCs and PLCs demonstrated that less than 0.1% of genes were significantly differentially expressed between these tumour subtypes. Our results demonstrate that ILCs differ from grade‐ and molecular subtype‐matched IDCs in the expression of genes related to cell adhesion, cell‐to‐cell signalling, and actin cytoskeleton signalling. However, classic ILCs and PLCs are remarkably similar at the molecular level and should be considered as part of a spectrum of lesions. Copyright © 2009 Pathological Society of Great Britain and Ireland. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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/path.2629

Cites

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

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Weigelt, B., Geyer, F. C., Natrajan, R., Lopez‐Garcia, M. A., Ahmad, A. S., Savage, K., Kreike, B., & Reis‐Filho, J. S.
Venue
The Journal of Pathology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2009-10-29
Volume
220
Issue
1
Pages
45-57
ISSN
  • 0022-3417 (ISSN-L)
  • 1096-9896
OpenAlex
W2021456586
Cited by
234
References
0
FWCI
8.16
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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

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.