Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 224

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 18 of the 18 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The Proteomic Landscape of Triple-Negative Breast Cancer

Open access
Lawrence, Robert T., Perez, Elizabeth M., Hernández, Daniel, Miller, Chris P., Haas, Kelsey M., Irie, Hanna Y., Lee, Su-In, Blau, C. Anthony, Villén, Judit·2015·Cell Reports

Abstract

Triple-negative breast cancer is a heterogeneous disease characterized by poor clinical outcomes and a shortage of targeted treatment options. To discover molecular features of triple-negative breast cancer, we performed quantitative proteomics analysis of twenty human-derived breast cell lines and four primary breast tumors to a depth of more than 12,000 distinct proteins. We used this data to identify breast cancer subtypes at the protein level and demonstrate the precise quantification of biomarkers, signaling proteins, and biological pathways by mass spectrometry. We integrated proteomics data with exome sequence resources to identify genomic aberrations that affect protein expression. We performed a high-throughput drug screen to identify protein markers of drug sensitivity and understand the mechanisms of drug resistance. The genome and proteome provide complementary information that, when combined, yield a powerful engine for therapeutic discovery. This resource is available to the cancer research community to catalyze further analysis and investigation.

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 · 10.1016/j.celrep.2015.03.050

Cites

18 of 18 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

Cited by

See all 224

Metadata

Authors
Lawrence, R. T., Perez, E. M., Hernández, D., Miller, C. P., Haas, K. M., Irie, H. Y., Lee, S.-I., Blau, C. A., & Villén, J.
Venue
Cell Reports
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2015-04
Volume
11
Issue
4
Pages
630-644
ISSN
2211-1247 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1996822667
Cited by
224
References
18
FWCI
12.59
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

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.