Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21990379›Full record

ArticleGenome research2012

Genomic analysis of circulating cell-free DNA infers breast cancer dormancy.

Jacqueline A Shaw, Karen Page, Kevin Blighe, Natasha Hava, David Guttery, Becky Ward, James Brown, Chetana Ruangpratheep, Justin Stebbing, Rachel Payne and 4 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Genome research, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 83 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
83citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

83 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 181 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Omics-Based Investigations of Breast Cancer.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review

23 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Jacqueline A ShawDepartment of Cancer Studies and Molecular Medicine, University of Leicester, Leicester LE2 7LX, United Kingdom. js39@leicester.ac.uk
Karen Page
Kevin Blighe
Natasha Hava
David Guttery
Becky Ward
James Brown
Chetana Ruangpratheep
Justin Stebbing
Rachel Payne
Carlo Palmieri
Suzy Cleator
Rosemary A Walker
R Charles Coombes
Hammersmith Hospital · GBUniversity of Leicester · GB

Funding

Cancer Research UK 13462Cancer Research UK 14549Department of Health NIHR-RP-011-053Medical Research Council G1100425
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Biomarkers in breast cancer to monitor minimal residual disease have remained elusive. We hypothesized that genomic analysis of circulating free DNA (cfDNA) isolated from plasma may form the basis for a means of detecting and monitoring breast cancer. We profiled 251 genomes using Affymetrix SNP 6.0 arrays to determine copy number variations (CNVs) and loss of heterozygosity (LOH), comparing 138 cfDNA samples with matched primary tumor and normal leukocyte DNA in 65 breast cancer patients and eight healthy female controls. Concordance of SNP genotype calls in paired cfDNA and leukocyte DNA samples distinguished between breast cancer patients and healthy female controls (P < 0.0001) and between preoperative patients and patients on follow-up who had surgery and treatment (P = 0.0016). Principal component analyses of cfDNA SNP/copy number results also separated presurgical breast cancer patients from the healthy controls, suggesting specific CNVs in cfDNA have clinical significance. We identified focal high-level DNA amplification in paired tumor and cfDNA clustered in a number of chromosome arms, some of which harbor genes with oncogenic potential, including USP17L2 (DUB3), BRF1, MTA1, and JAG2. Remarkably, in 50 patients on follow-up, specific CNVs were detected in cfDNA, mirroring the primary tumor, up to 12 yr after diagnosis despite no other evidence of disease. These data demonstrate the potential of SNP/CNV analysis of cfDNA to distinguish between patients with breast cancer and healthy controls during routine follow-up. The genomic profiles of cfDNA infer dormancy/minimal residual disease in the majority of patients on follow-up.

Indexed as

Biomarkers, TumorBreast NeoplasmsChromosome AberrationsDNADNA Copy Number VariationsFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansLoss of HeterozygosityPolymorphism, Single NucleotideBiomarkers, TumorDNA

Identifiers

PMID21990379
PMCPMC3266030
OpenAlexW2117906597

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.