Evidence map›Paper›PMID 15598611›Full record

ArticleEnvironmental health perspectives2004

Prediction of toxicant-specific gene expression signatures after chemotherapeutic treatment of breast cell lines.

Melissa A Troester, Katherine A Hoadley, Joel S Parker, Charles M Perou

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Environmental health perspectives, 2004. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Melissa A TroesterDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA.
Katherine A Hoadley
Joel S Parker
Charles M Perou

Funding

Profiles of Sucsceptibility to Toxicant StressU19ES011391 · NIEHS · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI KAUFMANN, WILLIAM K · 2001 to 2007
$8.4M
NRSA IN GENETICST32GM007092 · NIGMS · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI SEKELSKY, JEFF J. · 1985 to 2019
$5.9M
ENVIRONMENTAL PATHOLOGYT32ES007017 · NIEHS · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI KAUFMAN, DAVID G. · 1985 to 2011
$5.1M
Gene Expression Responses to Oxidative StressF32ES012374 · NIEHS · UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI TROESTER, MELISSA A. · 2002 to 2004
$64k
NIEHS NIH HHS 2T32 ES 07017NIEHS NIH HHS 5F32 ES 012374NIEHS NIH HHS 5U19 ES 11391-03NIGMS NIH HHS 2T32 GM 07092
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Global gene expression profiling has demonstrated that the predominant cellular response to a range of toxicants is a general stress response. This stereotyped environmental stress response commonly includes repression of protein synthesis and cell-cycle-regulated genes and induction of DNA damage and oxidative stress-responsive genes. Our laboratory recently characterized the general stress response of breast cell lines derived from basal-like and luminal epithelium after treatment with doxorubicin (DOX) or 5-fluorouracil (5FU) and showed that each cell type has a distinct response. However, we expected that some of the expression changes induced by DOX and 5FU would be unique to each compound and might reflect the underlying mechanisms of action of these agents. Therefore, we employed supervised analyses (significance analysis of microarrays) to identify genes that showed differential expression between DOX-treated and 5FU-treated cell lines. We then used cross-validation analyses and identified genes that afforded high predictive accuracy in classifying samples into the two treatment classes. To test whether these gene lists had good predictive accuracy in an independent data set, we treated our panel of cell lines with etoposide, a compound mechanistically similar to DOX. We demonstrated that using expression patterns of 100 genes we were able to obtain 100% predictive accuracy in classifying the etoposide samples as being more similar in expression to DOX-treated than to 5FU-treated samples. These analyses also showed that toxicant-specific gene expression patterns, similar to general stress responses, vary according to cell type.

Indexed as

Antibiotics, AntineoplasticAntimetabolites, AntineoplasticAntineoplastic Agents, PhytogenicAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsBreast NeoplasmsCell Line, TumorDoxorubicinEtoposideFemaleFluorouracilGene Expression ProfilingGene Expression Regulation, NeoplasticHumansInhibitory Concentration 50Oligonucleotide Array Sequence AnalysisRNA, MessengerAntibiotics, AntineoplasticAntimetabolites, AntineoplasticAntineoplastic Agents, PhytogenicDoxorubicinEtoposideFluorouracilRNA, Messenger

Identifiers

PMID15598611
PMCPMC1247657

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC0
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.