Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 350

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

Paradoxical Relationship between Chromosomal Instability and Survival Outcome in Cancer

Open access
Birkbak, Nicolai J., Eklund, Aron C., Li, Qiyuan, McClelland, Sarah E., Endesfelder, David, Tan, Patrick, Tan, Iain B., Richardson, Andrea L., Szallasi, Zoltan, Swanton, Charles·2011·Cancer Research

Abstract

Chromosomal instability (CIN) is associated with poor prognosis in human cancer. However, in certain animal tumor models elevated CIN negatively impacts upon organism fitness, and is poorly tolerated by cancer cells. To better understand this seemingly contradictory relationship between CIN and cancer cell biological fitness and its relationship with clinical outcome, we applied the CIN70 expression signature, which correlates with DNA-based measures of structural chromosomal complexity and numerical CIN in vivo, to gene expression profiles of 2,125 breast tumors from 13 published cohorts. Tumors with extreme CIN, defined as the highest quartile CIN70 score, were predominantly of the estrogen receptor negative (ER−), basal-like phenotype and displayed the highest chromosomal structural complexity and chromosomal numerical instability. We found that the extreme CIN/ER− tumors were associated with improved prognosis relative to tumors with intermediate CIN70 scores in the third quartile. We also observed this paradoxical relationship between CIN and prognosis in ovarian, gastric, and non–small cell lung cancer, with poorest outcome in tumors with intermediate, rather than extreme, CIN70 scores. These results suggest a nonmonotonic relationship between gene signature expression and HR for survival outcome, which may explain the difficulties encountered in the identification of prognostic expression signatures in ER− breast cancer. Furthermore, the data are consistent with the intolerance of excessive CIN in carcinomas and provide a plausible strategy to define distinct prognostic patient cohorts with ER− breast cancer. Inclusion of a surrogate measurement of CIN may improve cancer risk stratification and future therapeutic approaches. Cancer Res; 71(10); 3447–52. ©2011 AACR.

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 · 10.1158/0008-5472.can-10-3667

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 350

Metadata

Authors
Birkbak, N. J., Eklund, A. C., Li, Q., McClelland, S. E., Endesfelder, D., Tan, P., Tan, I. B., Richardson, A. L., Szallasi, Z., & Swanton, C.
Venue
Cancer Research
Published
2011-05-15
Volume
71
Issue
10
Pages
3447-3452
ISSN
  • 0008-5472 (ISSN-L)
  • 1538-7445
OpenAlex
W2169016078
Cited by
350
References
3
FWCI
7.16
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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Paradoxical Relationship between Chromosomal Instability and Survival Outcome in Cancer. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1158/0008-5472.can-10-3667
The paper
Birkbak, N. J., Eklund, A. C., Li, Q., McClelland, S. E., Endesfelder, D., Tan, P., Tan, I. B., Richardson, A. L., Szallasi, Z., & Swanton, C. (2011). Paradoxical Relationship between Chromosomal Instability and Survival Outcome in Cancer. Cancer Research. https://doi.org/10.1158/0008-5472.can-10-3667

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.