Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 180

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Genomic analysis of circulating cell-free DNA infers breast cancer dormancy

Open access
Shaw, Jacqueline A., Page, Karen, Blighe, Kevin, Hava, Natasha, Guttery, David, Ward, Becky, Brown, James, Ruangpratheep, Chetana, Stebbing, Justin, Payne, Rachel, Palmieri, Carlo, Cleator, Suzy, Walker, Rosemary A., Coombes, R. Charles·2012·Genome Research

Abstract

Biomarkers in breast cancer to monitor minimal residual disease have remained elusive. We hypothesized that genomic analysis of circulating free DNA (cfDNA) isolated from plasma may form the basis for a means of detecting and monitoring breast cancer. We profiled 251 genomes using Affymetrix SNP 6.0 arrays to determine copy number variations (CNVs) and loss of heterozygosity (LOH), comparing 138 cfDNA samples with matched primary tumor and normal leukocyte DNA in 65 breast cancer patients and eight healthy female controls. Concordance of SNP genotype calls in paired cfDNA and leukocyte DNA samples distinguished between breast cancer patients and healthy female controls ( P < 0.0001) and between preoperative patients and patients on follow-up who had surgery and treatment ( P = 0.0016). Principal component analyses of cfDNA SNP/copy number results also separated presurgical breast cancer patients from the healthy controls, suggesting specific CNVs in cfDNA have clinical significance. We identified focal high-level DNA amplification in paired tumor and cfDNA clustered in a number of chromosome arms, some of which harbor genes with oncogenic potential, including USP17L2 ( DUB3) , BRF1 , MTA1 , and JAG2 . Remarkably, in 50 patients on follow-up, specific CNVs were detected in cfDNA, mirroring the primary tumor, up to 12 yr after diagnosis despite no other evidence of disease. These data demonstrate the potential of SNP/CNV analysis of cfDNA to distinguish between patients with breast cancer and healthy controls during routine follow-up. The genomic profiles of cfDNA infer dormancy/minimal residual disease in the majority of patients on follow-up.

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 · 10.1101/gr.123497.111

Cites

3 of 3 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 3 references

Cited by

See all 180

Metadata

Authors
Shaw, J. A., Page, K., Blighe, K., Hava, N., Guttery, D., Ward, B., Brown, J., Ruangpratheep, C., Stebbing, J., Payne, R., Palmieri, C., Cleator, S., Walker, R. A., & Coombes, R. C.
Venue
Genome Research
Published
2011-10-11
Volume
22
Issue
2
Pages
220-231
ISSN
1088-9051 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2117906597
Cited by
180
References
3
Type
posted content
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 circulating cell-free DNA infers breast cancer dormancy. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1101/gr.123497.111
The paper
Shaw, J. A., Page, K., Blighe, K., Hava, N., Guttery, D., Ward, B., Brown, J., Ruangpratheep, C., Stebbing, J., Payne, R., Palmieri, C., Cleator, S., Walker, R. A., & Coombes, R. C. (2012). Genomic analysis of circulating cell-free DNA infers breast cancer dormancy. Genome Research. https://doi.org/10.1101/gr.123497.111

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.