Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 831

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

Gene expression profiling spares early breast cancer patients from adjuvant therapy: derived and validated in two population-based cohorts

Open access
Pawitan, Yudi, Bjöhle, Judith, Amler, Lukas, Borg, Anna-Lena, Egyhazi, Suzanne, Hall, Per, Han, Xia, Holmberg, Lars, Huang, Fei, Klaar, Sigrid, Liu, Edison T, Miller, Lance, Nordgren, Hans, Ploner, Alexander, Sandelin, Kerstin, Shaw, Peter M, Smeds, Johanna, Skoog, Lambert, Wedrén, Sara, Bergh, Jonas·2005·Breast Cancer Research
DOI 10.1186/bcr1325
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Introduction: Adjuvant breast cancer therapy significantly improves survival, but overtreatment and undertreatment are major problems. Breast cancer expression profiling has so far mainly been used to identify women with a poor prognosis as candidates for adjuvant therapy but without demonstrated value for therapy prediction. Methods: We obtained the gene expression profiles of 159 population-derived breast cancer patients, and used hierarchical clustering to identify the signature associated with prognosis and impact of adjuvant therapies, defined as distant metastasis or death within 5 years. Independent datasets of 76 treated population-derived Swedish patients, 135 untreated population-derived Swedish patients and 78 Dutch patients were used for validation. The inclusion and exclusion criteria for the studies of population-derived Swedish patients were defined. Results: Among the 159 patients, a subset of 64 genes was found to give an optimal separation of patients with good and poor outcomes. Hierarchical clustering revealed three subgroups: patients who did well with therapy, patients who did well without therapy, and patients that failed to benefit from given therapy. The expression profile gave significantly better prognostication (odds ratio, 4.19; P = 0.007) (breast cancer end-points odds ratio, 10.64) compared with the Elston–Ellis histological grading (odds ratio of grade 2 vs 1 and grade 3 vs 1, 2.81 and 3.32 respectively; P = 0.24 and 0.16), tumor stage (odds ratio of stage 2 vs 1 and stage 3 vs 1, 1.11 and 1.28; P = 0.83 and 0.68) and age (odds ratio, 0.11; P = 0.55). The risk groups were consistent and validated in the independent Swedish and Dutch data sets used with 211 and 78 patients, respectively. Conclusion: We have identified discriminatory gene expression signatures working both on untreated and systematically treated primary breast cancer patients with the potential to spare them from adjuvant therapy.

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 · 10.1186/bcr1325

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

Metadata

Authors
Pawitan, Y., Bjöhle, J., Amler, L., Borg, A.-L., Egyhazi, S., Hall, P., Han, X., Holmberg, L., Huang, F., Klaar, S., Liu, E. T., Miller, L., Nordgren, H., Ploner, A., Sandelin, K., Shaw, P. M., Smeds, J., Skoog, L., Wedrén, S., & Bergh, J.
Venue
Breast Cancer Research
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2005-10-03
Volume
7
Issue
6
Pages
R953-64
ISSN
  • 1465-5411 (ISSN-L)
  • 1465-542X
DOI
10.1186/bcr1325
OpenAlex
W2096079397
Cited by
831
References
2
FWCI
9.49
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.