ArticleGenome biology2013
Modeling precision treatment of breast cancer.
Article in Genome biology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 178 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
178 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 315 citations in OpenAlex.
- Multi-modal meta-analysis of cancer cell line omics profiles identifies ECHDC1 as a novel breast tumor suppressor.Molecular systems biology · 2021Pooled it
- Methodological challenges in translational drug response modeling in cancer: A systematic analysis with FORESEE.PLoS computational biology · 2020Pooled it
- Prognostic Power of a Tumor Differentiation Gene Signature for Bladder Urothelial Carcinomas.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2018Pooled it
- Trial
- A chromatin-informed transcriptional regulatory framework to stratify patients and guide therapy selection in triple-negative breast cancer.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Identification and functional validation of EPS15L1 as a key driver of triple-negative breast cancer.NPJ breast cancer · 2026Article
- Intratumor heterogeneity in human basal like breast cancer is revealed by single cell molecular subtyping.Communications medicine · 2026Article
- BiDRA: Bayesian inference as a robust alternative to non-linear regression for dose-response efficiency metrics assessment.Bioinformatics advances · 2026Article
- Genetic evidence for PARP1 trapping as a driver of PARP inhibitor efficacy in BRCA mutant cancer cells.Nucleic acids research · 2025Article
- Artificial intelligence and anti-cancer drugs' response.Acta pharmaceutica Sinica. B · 2025Review
- Re-epithelialization of cancer cells increases autophagy and DNA damage: Implications for breast cancer dormancy and relapse.Science signaling · 2025Article
- Hypergraph-based analysis of weighted gene co-expression hypernetwork.Frontiers in genetics · 2025Article
- ASGCL: Adaptive Sparse Mapping-based graph contrastive learning network for cancer drug response prediction.PLoS computational biology · 2025Article
- Role of universal health coverage in improving quality of breast cancer care: an international comparison study.BMJ public health · 2024Article
- Article
- DeepAEG: a model for predicting cancer drug response based on data enhancement and edge-collaborative update strategies.BMC bioinformatics · 2024Article
- An inflamed tumor cell subpopulation promotes chemotherapy resistance in triple negative breast cancer.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Integrating molecular, biochemical, and immunohistochemical features as predictors of hepatocellular carcinoma drug response using machine-learning algorithms.Frontiers in molecular biosciences · 2024Article
- Predicting drug response from single-cell expression profiles of tumours.BMC medicine · 2023Article
- A performance evaluation of drug response prediction models for individual drugs.Scientific reports · 2023Article
118 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
27 authors at 11 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundFirst-generation molecular profiles for human breast cancers have enabled the identification of features that can predict therapeutic response; however, little is known about how the various data types can best be combined to yield optimal predictors. Collections of breast cancer cell lines mirror many aspects of breast cancer molecular pathobiology, and measurements of their omic and biological therapeutic responses are well-suited for development of strategies to identify the most predictive molecular feature sets.
resultsWe used least squares-support vector machines and random forest algorithms to identify molecular features associated with responses of a collection of 70 breast cancer cell lines to 90 experimental or approved therapeutic agents. The datasets analyzed included measurements of copy number aberrations, mutations, gene and isoform expression, promoter methylation and protein expression. Transcriptional subtype contributed strongly to response predictors for 25% of compounds, and adding other molecular data types improved prediction for 65%. No single molecular dataset consistently out-performed the others, suggesting that therapeutic response is mediated at multiple levels in the genome. Response predictors were developed and applied to TCGA data, and were found to be present in subsets of those patient samples.
conclusionsThese results suggest that matching patients to treatments based on transcriptional subtype will improve response rates, and inclusion of additional features from other profiling data types may provide additional benefit. Further, we suggest a systems biology strategy for guiding clinical trials so that patient cohorts most likely to respond to new therapies may be more efficiently identified.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.