Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22616718›Full record

ArticleBMC research notes2012

Differential expression of breast cancer-associated genes between stage- and age-matched tumor specimens from African- and Caucasian-American Women diagnosed with breast cancer.

Jessica M Grunda, Adam D Steg, Qinghua He, Mark R Steciuk, Suzanne Byan-Parker, Martin R Johnson, William E Grizzle

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC research notes, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 27% of its field
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

28 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 42 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Breast Cancer in Latinas: A Focus on Intrinsic Subtypes Distribution.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2018
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Jessica M GrundaDepartment of Medicine, Division of Endocrinology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL 35294, USA.
Adam D Steg
Qinghua He
Mark R Steciuk
Suzanne Byan-Parker
Martin R Johnson
William E Grizzle
University of Alabama at Birmingham · USTuskegee University · US

Funding

TRAINING AND CAREER DEVELOPMENTU54CA118948 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA AT BIRMINGHAM · PI Timiya S Nolan · 2005 to 2026
$26.6M
Research Education CoreU54CA118623 · NCI · TUSKEGEE UNIVERSITY · PI STEPHEN O SODEKE · 2005 to 2026
$20.2M
INFRASTRUCTURE IIG12MD007585 · NIMHD · TUSKEGEE UNIVERSITY · PI YATES, CLAYTON · 2012 to 2016
$4.6M
NCI NIH HHS U54 CA118623NCI NIH HHS U54 CA118948NIMHD NIH HHS G12 MD007585
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRecent studies suggest that the poorer breast cancer outcome observed in African-American women (AAW) may, in part, result from underlying molecular factors. The purpose of this study was to investigate gene expression differences between Caucasian-American women (CAW) and AAW that may contribute to this poorer prognosis.

methodsThe expression of 84 genes involved in breast carcinoma prognosis, response to therapy, estrogen signaling, and tumor aggressiveness was assessed in age- and stage-matched CAW and AAW paraffin-embedded breast cancer specimens. The Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney Test was used to identify genes with a significant difference in expression between CAW and AAW. To determine if the differentially expressed genes could segregate between the CAW and AAW, we performed semi-supervised principal component analysis (SSPCA).

resultsTwenty genes were differentially expressed between AAW and CAW. SSPCA incorporating these 20 genes segregated AAW and CAW into two distinct groups. AAW were significantly (p < 0.05) more likely to display aberrations in G(1)/S cell-cycle regulatory genes, decreased expression of cell-adhesion genes, and low to no expression of ESR1, PGR, ERBB2 and estrogen pathway targets.

conclusionsThe gene expression differences identified between AAW and CAW may contribute to more aggressive disease, resistance to therapy, enhanced metastatic potential and poor clinical outcome. These findings support the hypothesis that breast cancer specimens collected from AAW display distinct gene expression differences compared to similar tissues obtained from CAW. Additional population-based studies are necessary to determine if these gene expression variations contribute to the highly aggressive and treatment-resistant breast cancer phenotype frequently observed in AAW.

Indexed as

Age FactorsBiomarkers, TumorBiopsyBlack or African AmericanBreast NeoplasmsCarcinoma, Ductal, BreastChi-Square DistributionFemaleGene Expression ProfilingGene Expression Regulation, NeoplasticGenetic Predisposition to DiseaseHumansImmunohistochemistryMultivariate AnalysisNeoplasm StagingPhenotypeBiomarkers, Tumor

Identifiers

PMID22616718
PMCPMC3476447
OpenAlexW2110961653

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.