Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 212

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

High resolution genomic analysis of sporadic breast cancer using array-based comparative genomic hybridization

Open access
Naylor, Tara L, Greshock, Joel, Wang, Yan, Colligon, Theresa, Yu, QC, Clemmer, Virginia, Zaks, Tal Z, Weber, Barbara L·2005·Breast Cancer Research

Abstract

Introduction: Genomic aberrations in the form of subchromosomal DNA copy number changes are a hallmark of epithelial cancers, including breast cancer. The goal of the present study was to analyze such aberrations in breast cancer at high resolution. Methods: We employed high-resolution array comparative genomic hybridization with 4,134 bacterial artificial chromosomes that cover the genome at 0.9 megabase resolution to analyze 47 primary breast tumors and 18 breast cancer cell lines. Results: Common amplicons included 8q24.3 (amplified in 79% of tumors, with 5/47 exhibiting high level amplification), 1q32.1 and 16p13.3 (amplified in 66% and 57% of tumors, respectively). Moreover, we found several positive correlations between specific amplicons from different chromosomes, suggesting the existence of cooperating genetic loci. Queried by gene, the most frequently amplified kinase was PTK2 (79% of tumors), whereas the most frequently lost kinase was PTK2B (hemizygous loss in 34% of tumors). Amplification of ERBB2 as measured by comparative genomic hybridization (CGH) correlated closely with ERBB2 DNA and RNA levels measured by quantitative PCR as well as with ERBB2 protein levels. The overall frequency of recurrent losses was lower, with no region lost in more than 50% of tumors; the most frequently lost tumor suppressor gene was RB1 (hemizygous loss in 26% of tumors). Finally, we find that specific copy number changes in cell lines closely mimicked those in primary tumors, with an overall Pearson correlation coefficient of 0.843 for gains and 0.734 for losses. Conclusion: High resolution CGH analysis of breast cancer reveals several regions where DNA copy number is commonly gained or lost, that non-random correlations between specific amplicons exist, and that specific genetic alterations are maintained in breast cancer cell lines despite repeat passage in tissue culture. These observations suggest that genes within these regions are critical to the malignant phenotype and may thus serve as future therapeutic targets.

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/bcr1356

Cites

5 of 5 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 5 references

Cited by

See all 212

Metadata

Authors
Naylor, T. L., Greshock, J., Wang, Y., Colligon, T., Yu, Q., Clemmer, V., Zaks, T. Z., & Weber, B. L.
Venue
Breast Cancer Research
Published
2005-11-24
Volume
7
Issue
6
Pages
R1186-98
ISSN
  • 1465-5411 (ISSN-L)
  • 1465-542X
OpenAlex
W2115604365
Cited by
212
References
5
FWCI
7.90
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

How to cite

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

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: High resolution genomic analysis of sporadic breast cancer using array-based comparative genomic hybridization. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1186/bcr1356
The paper
Naylor, T. L., Greshock, J., Wang, Y., Colligon, T., Yu, Q., Clemmer, V., Zaks, T. Z., & Weber, B. L. (2005). High resolution genomic analysis of sporadic breast cancer using array-based comparative genomic hybridization. Breast Cancer Research. https://doi.org/10.1186/bcr1356

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.