The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Molecular Anatomy of Breast Cancer Stroma and Its Prognostic Value in Estrogen Receptor–Positive and –Negative Cancers
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to identify genes enriched in breast cancer stroma, assess the stromal gene expression differences between estrogen receptor (ER) –positive and –negative cancers, and separately determine their prognostic value in these two subtypes of breast cancers. Methods: We compared gene expression profiles of pairs of fine-needle (stroma-poor) and core-needle (stroma-rich) biopsies from 37 cancers to identify stroma-associated genes. We defined stromal metagenes and tested their prognostic values in 684 node-negative patients who received no systemic adjuvant therapy and 259 tamoxifen-treated patients. Results: We identified 293 probe sets overexpressed in core biopsies; these included five highly coexpressed gene clusters (metagenes) corresponding to immune functions and extracellular matrix components. These genes showed quantitative and qualitative differences between ER-positive and ER-negative cancers. A B-cell/plasma cell metagene showed strong prognostic value in ER-positive highly proliferative cancers, a lesser prognostic value in ER-negative cancers, and no prognostic value in ER-positive cancers with low proliferation. The hazard ratio for distant relapse in the lowest compared with the highest tertile of the pooled prognostic data set was 4.29 (95% CI, 2.04 to 9.01; P = .001) in ER-positive cancers and 3.34 (95% CI, 1.60 to 6.97; P = .001) in ER-negative cancers. This remained significant in multivariate analysis including routine variables and other genomic prognostic scores. As a result of quantitative differences in this metagene between ER-positive and ER-negative cancers, different thresholds apply in the two subgroups. Other stromal metagenes had inconsistent prognostic value. Conclusion: Among ER-negative and ER-positive highly proliferative cancers, a subset of tumors with high expression of a B-cell/plasma cell metagene carries a favorable 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
Kalluri, R., & Zeisberg, M. (2006) · Nature Reviews Cancer · doi:10.1038/nrc1877 · Cited by 4,538
Tumorigenesis and the angiogenic switch
Bergers, G., & Benjamin, L. E. (2003) · Nature reviews. Cancer · doi:10.1038/nrc1093 · Cited by 3,559
Transitions between epithelial and mesenchymal states: acquisition of malignant and stem cell traits
Polyak, K., & Weinberg, R. A. (2009) · Nature Reviews Cancer · doi:10.1038/nrc2620 · Cited by 3,302
Snail, Zeb and bHLH factors in tumour progression: An alliance against the epithelial phenotype?
Peinado, H., Olmeda, D., & Cano, A. (2007) · Nature reviews. Cancer · doi:10.1038/nrc2131 · Cited by 3,121
Cited by
Triple-negative breast cancer: challenges and opportunities of a heterogeneous disease
Bianchini, G., Balko, J. M., Mayer, I. A., Sanders, M. E., & Gianni, L. (2016) · Nature Reviews Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1038/nrclinonc.2016.66 · Cited by 3,079
Self-citationDenkert, C., von Minckwitz, G., Darb-Esfahani, S., Lederer, B., Heppner, B. I., Weber, K. E., Budczies, J., Huober, J., Klauschen, F., Furlanetto, J., et al. (2018) · The Lancet Oncology · doi:10.1016/s1470-2045(17)30904-x · Cited by 2,157
Győrffy, B. (2021) · Computational and Structural Biotechnology Journal · doi:10.1016/j.csbj.2021.07.014 · Cited by 1,648
Treatment landscape of triple-negative breast cancer — expanded options, evolving needs
Bianchini, G., De Angelis, C., Licata, L., & Gianni, L. (2022) · Nature Reviews Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1038/s41571-021-00565-2 · Cited by 1,382
Self-citationCD4+ follicular helper T cell infiltration predicts breast cancer survival
Gu-Trantien, C., Loi, S., Garaud, S., Equeter, C., Libin, M., de Wind, A., Ravoet, M., Le Buanec, H., Sibille, C., Manfouo-Foutsop, G., et al. (2013) · Journal of Clinical Investigation · doi:10.1172/jci67428 · Cited by 1,070
Metadata
- Authors
- Bianchini, G., Qi, Y., Alvarez, R. H., Iwamoto, T., Coutant, C., Ibrahim, N. K., Valero, V., Cristofanilli, M., Green, M. C., Radvanyi, L., Hatzis, C., Hortobagyi, G. N., Andre, F., Gianni, L., Symmans, W. F., & Pusztai, L.
- Venue
- Journal of Clinical Oncology
- Published
- 2010-10-01
- Volume
- 28
- Issue
- 28
- Pages
- 4316-4323
- ISSN
- 0732-183X (ISSN-L)
- 1527-7755
- OpenAlex
- W2169360530
- Cited by
- 228
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 4.52
- 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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Molecular Anatomy of Breast Cancer Stroma and Its Prognostic Value in Estrogen Receptor–Positive and –Negative Cancers. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1200/jco.2009.27.2419
- The paper
- Bianchini, G., Qi, Y., Alvarez, R. H., Iwamoto, T., Coutant, C., Ibrahim, N. K., Valero, V., Cristofanilli, M., Green, M. C., Radvanyi, L., Hatzis, C., Hortobagyi, G. N., Andre, F., Gianni, L., Symmans, W. F., & Pusztai, L. (2010). Molecular Anatomy of Breast Cancer Stroma and Its Prognostic Value in Estrogen Receptor–Positive and –Negative Cancers. Journal of Clinical Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2009.27.2419
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.
