The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Definition of Clinically Distinct Molecular Subtypes in Estrogen Receptor–Positive Breast Carcinomas Through Genomic Grade
Abstract
Purpose: A number of microarray studies have reported distinct molecular profiles of breast cancers (BC), such as basal-like, ErbB2-like, and two to three luminal-like subtypes. These were associated with different clinical outcomes. However, although the basal and the ErbB2 subtypes are repeatedly recognized, identification of estrogen receptor (ER) –positive subtypes has been inconsistent. Therefore, refinement of their molecular definition is needed. Materials and Methods: We have previously reported a gene expression grade index (GGI), which defines histologic grade based on gene expression profiles. Using this algorithm, we assigned ER-positive BC to either high–or low–genomic grade subgroups and compared these with previously reported ER-positive molecular classifications. As further validation, we classified 666 ER-positive samples into subtypes and assessed their clinical outcome. Results: Two ER-positive molecular subgroups (high and low genomic grade) could be defined using the GGI. Despite tracking a single biologic pathway, these were highly comparable to the previously described luminal A and B classification and significantly correlated to the risk groups produced using the 21-gene recurrence score. The two subtypes were associated with statistically distinct clinical outcome in both systemically untreated and tamoxifen-treated populations. Conclusion: The use of genomic grade can identify two clinically distinct ER-positive molecular subtypes in a simple and highly reproducible manner across multiple data sets. This study emphasizes the important role of proliferation-related genes in predicting prognosis in ER-positive BC.
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
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
Modeling Survival Data: Extending the Cox Model
Therneau, T. M., & Grambsch, P. M. (2000) · Statistics for Biology and Health · doi:10.1007/978-1-4757-3294-8 · Cited by 8,674
Coombes, R. C., Hall, E., Gibson, L. J., Paridaens, R., Jassem, J., Delozier, T., Jones, S. E., Alvarez, I., Bertelli, G., Ortmann, O., et al. (2004) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa040331 · Cited by 1,759
Cited by
Györffy, B., Lanczky, A., Eklund, A. C., Denkert, C., Budczies, J., Li, Q., & Szallasi, Z. (2010) · Breast Cancer Research and Treatment · doi:10.1007/s10549-009-0674-9 · Cited by 4,169
The Hippo transducer TAZ confers cancer stem cell-related traits on breast cancer cells
Cordenonsi, M., Zanconato, F., Azzolin, L., Forcato, M., Rosato, A., Frasson, C., Inui, M., Montagner, M., Parenti, A. R., Poletti, A., et al. (2011) · Cell · doi:10.1016/j.cell.2011.09.048 · Cited by 1,381
Hatzis, C. (2011) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2011.593 · Cited by 699
Ferroportin and Iron Regulation in Breast Cancer Progression and Prognosis
Pinnix, Z. K., Miller, L. D., Wang, W., D’Agostino, R., Kute, T., Willingham, M. C., Hatcher, H., Tesfay, L., Sui, G., Di, X., et al. (2010) · Science Translational Medicine · doi:10.1126/scitranslmed.3001127 · Cited by 448
DeFilippis, R. A., Chang, H., Dumont, N., Rabban, J. T., Chen, Y.-Y., Fontenay, G. V., Berman, H. K., Gauthier, M. L., Zhao, J., Hu, D., et al. (2012) · Cancer Discovery · doi:10.1158/2159-8290.cd-12-0107 · Cited by 212
Kennedy, J. J., Abbatiello, S. E., Kim, K., Yan, P., Whiteaker, J. R., Lin, C., Kim, J. S., Zhang, Y., Wang, X., Ivey, R. G., et al. (2014) · Nature Methods · doi:10.1038/nmeth.2763 · Cited by 184
Xiang, L., Gilkes, D. M., Hu, H., Takano, N., Luo, W., Lu, H., Bullen, J. W., Samanta, D., Liang, H., & Semenza, G. L. (2014) · Oncotarget · doi:10.18632/oncotarget.2997 · Cited by 119
Al-Ejeh, F., Simpson, P. T., Sanus, J. M., Klein, K., Kalimutho, M., Shi, W., Miranda, M., Kutasovic, J., Raghavendra, A., Madore, J., et al. (2014) · Oncogenesis · doi:10.1038/oncsis.2014.14 · Cited by 107
Coutant, C., Rouzier, R., Qi, Y., Lehmann-Che, J., Bianchini, G., Iwamoto, T., Hortobagyi, G. N., Symmans, W. F., Uzan, S., Andre, F., et al. (2011) · Clinical Cancer Research · doi:10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-10-1045 · Cited by 64
Metadata
- Authors
- Loi, S., Haibe-Kains, B., Desmedt, C., Lallemand, F., Tutt, A. M., Gillet, C., Ellis, P., Harris, A., Bergh, J., Foekens, J. A., Klijn, J. G. M., Larsimont, D., Buyse, M., Bontempi, G., Delorenzi, M., Piccart, M. J., & Sotiriou, C.
- Venue
- Journal of Clinical Oncology
- Published
- 2007-04-01
- Volume
- 25
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 1239-1246
- ISSN
- 0732-183X (ISSN-L)
- 1527-7755
- OpenAlex
- W2150533948
- Cited by
- 837
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 23.25
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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.
