Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 5,429

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Repeated observation of breast tumor subtypes in independent gene expression data sets

Open access
Sørlie, Therese, Tibshirani, Robert, Parker, Joel, Hastie, Trevor, Marron, J. S., Nobel, Andrew, Deng, Shibing, Johnsen, Hilde, Pesich, Robert, Geisler, Stephanie, Demeter, Janos, Perou, Charles M., Lønning, Per E., Brown, Patrick O., Børresen-Dale, Anne-Lise, Botstein, David·2003·Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Abstract

Characteristic patterns of gene expression measured by DNA microarrays have been used to classify tumors into clinically relevant subgroups. In this study, we have refined the previously defined subtypes of breast tumors that could be distinguished by their distinct patterns of gene expression. A total of 115 malignant breast tumors were analyzed by hierarchical clustering based on patterns of expression of 534 “intrinsic” genes and shown to subdivide into one basal-like, one ERBB2 -overexpressing, two luminal-like, and one normal breast tissue-like subgroup. The genes used for classification were selected based on their similar expression levels between pairs of consecutive samples taken from the same tumor separated by 15 weeks of neoadjuvant treatment. Similar cluster analyses of two published, independent data sets representing different patient cohorts from different laboratories, uncovered some of the same breast cancer subtypes. In the one data set that included information on time to development of distant metastasis, subtypes were associated with significant differences in this clinical feature. By including a group of tumors from BRCA1 carriers in the analysis, we found that this genotype predisposes to the basal tumor subtype. Our results strongly support the idea that many of these breast tumor subtypes represent biologically distinct disease entities.

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 · 10.1073/pnas.0932692100

Cites

2 of 2 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 2 references

Cited by

See all 5,429

Metadata

Authors
Sørlie, T., Tibshirani, R., Parker, J., Hastie, T., Marron, J. S., Nobel, A., Deng, S., Johnsen, H., Pesich, R., Geisler, S., Demeter, J., Perou, C. M., Lønning, P. E., Brown, P. O., Børresen-Dale, A.-L., & Botstein, D.
Venue
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Published
2003-06-26
Volume
100
Issue
14
Pages
8418-8423
ISSN
  • 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
  • 1091-6490
OpenAlex
W2157840751
Cited by
5,429
References
2
FWCI
60.34
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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: Repeated observation of breast tumor subtypes in independent gene expression data sets. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1073/pnas.0932692100
The paper
Sørlie, T., Tibshirani, R., Parker, J., Hastie, T., Marron, J. S., Nobel, A., Deng, S., Johnsen, H., Pesich, R., Geisler, S., Demeter, J., Perou, C. M., Lønning, P. E., Brown, P. O., Børresen-Dale, A.-L., & Botstein, D. (2003). Repeated observation of breast tumor subtypes in independent gene expression data sets. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0932692100

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.