The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Meta-analysis of gene expression profiles in breast cancer: toward a unified understanding of breast cancer subtyping and prognosis signatures
Open accessAbstract
Introduction: Breast cancer subtyping and prognosis have been studied extensively by gene expression profiling, resulting in disparate signatures with little overlap in their constituent genes. Although a previous study demonstrated a prognostic concordance among gene expression signatures, it was limited to only one dataset and did not fully elucidate how the different genes were related to one another nor did it examine the contribution of well-known biological processes of breast cancer tumorigenesis to their prognostic performance. Method: To address the above issues and to further validate these initial findings, we performed the largest meta-analysis of publicly available breast cancer gene expression and clinical data, which are comprised of 2,833 breast tumors. Gene coexpression modules of three key biological processes in breast cancer (namely, proliferation, estrogen receptor [ER], and HER2 signaling) were used to dissect the role of constituent genes of nine prognostic signatures. Results: Using a meta-analytical approach, we consolidated the signatures associated with ER signaling, ERBB2 amplification, and proliferation. Previously published expression-based nomenclature of breast cancer 'intrinsic' subtypes can be mapped to the three modules, namely, the ER-/HER2- (basal-like), the HER2+ (HER2-like), and the low- and high-proliferation ER+/HER2- subtypes (luminal A and B). We showed that all nine prognostic signatures exhibited a similar prognostic performance in the entire dataset. Their prognostic abilities are due mostly to the detection of proliferation activity. Although ER- status (basal-like) and ERBB2+ expression status correspond to bad outcome, they seem to act through elevated expression of proliferation genes and thus contain only indirect information about prognosis. Clinical variables measuring the extent of tumor progression, such as tumor size and nodal status, still add independent prognostic information to proliferation genes. Conclusion: This meta-analysis unifies various results of previous gene expression studies in breast cancer. It reveals connections between traditional prognostic factors, expression-based subtyping, and prognostic signatures, highlighting the important role of proliferation in breast cancer prognosis.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
McLachlan, G., & Peel, D. (2000) · Wiley Series in Probability and Statistics · doi:10.1002/0471721182 · Cited by 10,991
Gene expression profiling predicts clinical outcome of breast cancer
van 't Veer, L. J., Dai, H., van de Vijver, M. J., He, Y. D., Hart, A. A. M., Mao, M., Peterse, H. L., van der Kooy, K., Marton, M. J., Witteveen, A. T., et al. (2002) · Nature · doi:10.1038/415530a · Cited by 9,536
MAQC Consortium, Shi, L., Shi, L., Reid, L. H., Jones, W. D., Shippy, R., Warrington, J. A., Baker, S. C., Collins, P. J., de Longueville, F., et al. (2006) · Nature Biotechnology · doi:10.1038/nbt1239 · Cited by 2,126
Common markers of proliferation
Whitfield, M. L., George, L. K., Grant, G. D., & Perou, C. M. (2006) · Nature Reviews Cancer · doi:10.1038/nrc1802 · Cited by 650 · cited 2×
“CCYC [44] Periodic expression in cell cycle progression NA 126”
Background
Cited by
Multi-omics Data Integration, Interpretation, and Its Application
Subramanian, I., Verma, S., Kumar, S., Jere, A., & Anamika, K. (2020) · Bioinformatics and Biology Insights · doi:10.1177/1177932219899051 · Cited by 1,609
The chromatin accessibility landscape of primary human cancers
Corces, M. R., Granja, J. M., Shams, S., Louie, B. H., Seoane, J. A., Zhou, W., Silva, T. C., Groeneveld, C., Wong, C. K., Cho, S. W., et al. (2018) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.aav1898 · Cited by 1,230
Single-cell RNA-seq enables comprehensive tumour and immune cell profiling in primary breast cancer
Chung, W., Eum, H. H., Lee, H.-O., Lee, K.-M., Lee, H.-B., Kim, K.-T., Ryu, H. S., Kim, S., Lee, J. E., Park, Y. H., et al. (2017) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/ncomms15081 · Cited by 992
Vaske, C. J., Benz, S. C., Sanborn, J. Z., Earl, D., Szeto, C., Zhu, J., Haussler, D., & Stuart, J. M. (2010) · Bioinformatics · doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btq182 · Cited by 786
Molecular biology in breast cancer: Intrinsic subtypes and signaling pathways
Eroles, P., Bosch, A., Alejandro Pérez-Fidalgo, J., & Lluch, A. (2012) · Cancer Treatment Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.ctrv.2011.11.005 · Cited by 624
Metadata
- Authors
- Wirapati, P., Sotiriou, C., Kunkel, S., Farmer, P., Pradervand, S., Haibe-Kains, B., Desmedt, C., Ignatiadis, M., Sengstag, T., Schütz, F., Goldstein, D. R., Piccart, M., & Delorenzi, M.
- Venue
- Breast Cancer Research
- Published
- 2008-07-28
- Volume
- 10
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- R65-R65
- ISSN
- 1465-5411 (ISSN-L)
- 1465-542X
- OpenAlex
- W2137028370
- Cited by
- 891
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 3.29
- 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: Meta-analysis of gene expression profiles in breast cancer: toward a unified understanding of breast cancer subtyping and prognosis signatures. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1186/bcr2124
- The paper
- Wirapati, P., Sotiriou, C., Kunkel, S., Farmer, P., Pradervand, S., Haibe-Kains, B., Desmedt, C., Ignatiadis, M., Sengstag, T., Schütz, F., Goldstein, D. R., Piccart, M., & Delorenzi, M. (2008). Meta-analysis of gene expression profiles in breast cancer: toward a unified understanding of breast cancer subtyping and prognosis signatures. Breast Cancer Research. https://doi.org/10.1186/bcr2124
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.