Cited by 440Cancer Cells and MetastasisBreast Cancer Treatment StudiesDevelopmental Biology and Gene Regulation

Transcriptome analyses of mouse and human mammary cell subpopulations reveal multiple conserved genes and pathways

Open access
Lim, Elgene, Wu, Di, Pal, Bhupinder, Bouras, Toula, Asselin-Labat, Marie-Liesse, Vaillant, François, Yagita, Hideo, Lindeman, Geoffrey J +2 more·2010·Breast Cancer Research

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Molecular characterization of the normal epithelial cell types that reside in the mammary gland is an important step toward understanding pathways that regulate self-renewal, lineage commitment, and differentiation along the hierarchy. Here we determined the gene expression signatures of four distinct subpopulations isolated from the mouse mammary gland. The epithelial cell signatures were used to interrogate mouse models of mammary tumorigenesis and to compare with their normal human counterpart subsets to identify conserved genes and networks. METHODS: RNA was prepared from freshly sorted mouse mammary cell subpopulations (mammary stem cell (MaSC)-enriched, committed luminal progenitor, mature luminal and stromal cell) and used for gene expression profiling analysis on the Illumina platform. Gene signatures were derived and compared with those previously reported for the analogous normal human mammary cell subpopulations. The mouse and human epithelial subset signatures were then subjected to Ingenuity Pathway Analysis (IPA) to identify conserved pathways. RESULTS: The four mouse mammary cell subpopulations exhibited distinct gene signatures. Comparison of these signatures with the molecular profiles of different mouse models of mammary tumorigenesis revealed that tumors arising in MMTV-Wnt-1 and p53-/- mice were enriched for MaSC-subset genes, whereas the gene profiles of MMTV-Neu and MMTV-PyMT tumors were most concordant with the luminal progenitor cell signature. Comparison of the mouse mammary epithelial cell signatures with their human counterparts revealed substantial conservation of genes, whereas IPA highlighted a number of conserved pathways in the three epithelial subsets. CONCLUSIONS: The conservation of genes and pathways across species further validates the use of the mouse as a model to study mammary gland development and highlights pathways that are likely to govern cell-fate decisions and differentiation. It is noteworthy that many of the conserved genes in the MaSC population have been considered as epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT) signature genes. Therefore, the expression of these genes in tumor cells may reflect basal epithelial cell characteristics and not necessarily cells that have undergone an EMT. Comparative analyses of normal mouse epithelial subsets with murine tumor models have implicated distinct cell types in contributing to tumorigenesis in the different models.

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/bcr2560

Cites

41 of 41 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Gene Expression Omnibus http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/geo

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lim, E., Wu, D., Pal, B., Bouras, T., Asselin-Labat, M.-L., Vaillant, F., Yagita, H., Lindeman, G. J., Smyth, G. K., & Visvader, J. E.
Affiliations
  • The University of Melbourne (AU)
  • Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research (AU)
  • The Royal Melbourne Hospital (AU)
Corresponding author
Visvader, Jane E
Venue
Breast Cancer Research
Published
2010-03-26
Volume
12
Issue
2
Pages
R21-R21
ISSN
  • 1465-5411 (ISSN-L)
  • 1465-542X
OpenAlex
W2160779973
Cited by
440
References
41
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 33 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 29 · 2021: 41 · 2020: 26 · 2019: 33 · 2018: 22 · 2017: 25 · 2016: 31 · 2015: 35 · 2014: 33 · 2013: 26 · 2012: 24
FWCI
14.72
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Breast Cancer Research (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Minerva Access (University of Melbourne) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • Victorian Cancer Agency
  • Australian Cancer Research Foundation
  • National Breast Cancer Foundation
  • Medical Research Council
  • Australian Research Council
  • National Health and Medical Research Council
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer Cells and Metastasis
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cancer Research › Breast Cancer Treatment Studies
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Developmental Biology and Gene Regulation
Keywords
mammary epithelium, mammary stem cells, luminal progenitor cells, mammary carcinogenesis, MMTV-neu, MMTV-PyMT, p53-deficient mice, gene expression signatures, cross-species conservation, epithelial-mesenchymal transition, mammary gland development, cell fate determination, human-mouse comparison
MeSH terms
Animals, Humans, Mammary Glands, Animal, Signal Transduction, Mammary Neoplasms, Animal, Conserved Sequence, Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction, Oligonucleotide Array Sequence Analysis, Gene Expression Profiling, Mammary Glands, Human, Mice

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