Cited by 296BRCA gene mutations in cancerPARP inhibition in cancer therapyDNA Repair Mechanisms

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 70 of the 70 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

BRCA locus-specific loss of heterozygosity in germline BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers

Open access

Abstract

Complete loss of BRCA1 or BRCA2 function is associated with sensitivity to DNA damaging agents. However, not all BRCA1 and BRCA2 germline mutation-associated tumors respond. Herein we report analyses of 160 BRCA1 and BRCA2 germline mutation-associated breast and ovarian tumors. Retention of the normal BRCA1 or BRCA2 allele (absence of locus-specific loss of heterozygosity (LOH)) is observed in 7% of BRCA1 ovarian, 16% of BRCA2 ovarian, 10% of BRCA1 breast, and 46% of BRCA2 breast tumors. These tumors have equivalent homologous recombination deficiency scores to sporadic tumors, significantly lower than scores in tumors with locus-specific LOH (ovarian, P = 0.0004; breast P < 0.0001, two-tailed Student’s t -test). Absence of locus-specific LOH is associated with decreased overall survival in ovarian cancer patients treated with platinum chemotherapy ( P = 0.01, log-rank test). Locus-specific LOH may be a clinically useful biomarker to predict primary resistance to DNA damaging agents in patients with germline BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations.

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 · 10.1038/s41467-017-00388-9

Cites

70 of 70 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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Only two of 22 (9% versus 46%) BRCA2-carrier tumours lacked biallelic inactivation; one was BRCA-deficient due to biallelic BRCA1 inactivation, and the other was BRCA-proficient and unlikely to benefit from such therapies.

    “In contrast to a recent report, only two tumours (2/22, 9% versus 46% [5]) from BRCA2 carriers did not exhibit biallelic inactivation of the gene; one tumour was BRCA-deficient due to the biallelic inactivation of BRCA1, whereas the other was BRCA-proficient, and hence this latter patient would be unlikely to benefit from such therapies.”

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

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Maxwell, K. N., Wubbenhorst, B., Wenz, B. M., De Sloover, D., Pluta, J., Emery, L., Barrett, A., Kraya, A. A., Anastopoulos, I. N., Yu, S., Jiang, Y., Chen, H., Zhang, N. R., Hackman, N., D’Andrea, K., Daber, R., Morrissette, J. J. D., Mitra, N., Feldman, M., Domchek, S. M., & Nathanson, K. L.
Affiliations
  • University of Pennsylvania (US)
  • University of California, Davis (US)
  • Abramson Cancer Center (US)
Corresponding author
Nathanson, Katherine L.
Venue
Nature Communications
Published
2017-08-22
Volume
8
Issue
1
Pages
319-319
ISSN
2041-1723 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2748606465
Cited by
296
References
70
Citations by year
2026: 21 · 2025: 26 · 2024: 36 · 2023: 36 · 2022: 38 · 2021: 41 · 2020: 46 · 2019: 28 · 2018: 21 · 2017: 2
FWCI
17.56
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nature Communications (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • U.S. Department of Defense (W81XWH, W81XWH1310338, W81XWH-13)
  • University of Pennsylvania
  • National Institutes of Health (W81XWH)
  • National Institute of General Medical Sciences (T32GM008638)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › BRCA gene mutations in cancer
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › PARP inhibition in cancer therapy
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › DNA Repair Mechanisms
Keywords
BRCA1, BRCA2, germline mutations, loss of heterozygosity, breast cancer, ovarian cancer, homologous recombination deficiency, DNA damage response, overall survival, tumor markers
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Breast Neoplasms, Female, Humans, Middle Aged, Ovarian Neoplasms, Promoter Regions, Genetic, Proportional Hazards Models, Outcome Assessment, Health Care, Germ-Line Mutation, DNA Methylation, BRCA1 Protein, Loss of Heterozygosity, BRCA2 Protein, Kaplan-Meier Estimate

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