Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24732363›Full record

ArticlePloS one2014

Expression profiling of primary and metastatic ovarian tumors reveals differences indicative of aggressive disease.

Alexander S Brodsky, Andrew Fischer, Daniel H Miller, Souriya Vang, Shannon MacLaughlan, Hsin-Ta Wu, Jovian Yu, Margaret Steinhoff, Colin Collins, Peter J S Smith and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 49 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
49citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

49 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Gynecologic oncology reports · 2021
    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

12 authors.

Alexander S BrodskyDepartment of Molecular Biology, Cell Biology, and Biochemistry, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island, United States of America; Center for Computational Molecular Biology, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island, United States of America; Center for Genomics and Proteomics, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island, United States of America.
Andrew FischerDepartment of Molecular Biology, Cell Biology, and Biochemistry, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island, United States of America.
Daniel H MillerDepartment of Molecular Biology, Cell Biology, and Biochemistry, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island, United States of America.
Souriya VangDepartment of Molecular Biology, Cell Biology, and Biochemistry, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island, United States of America.
Shannon MacLaughlanProgram in Women's Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Women and Infants' Hospital, Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island, United States of America.
Hsin-Ta WuDepartment of Molecular Biology, Cell Biology, and Biochemistry, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island, United States of America; Center for Computational Molecular Biology, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island, United States of America; Department of Computer Science, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island, United States of America.
Jovian YuCenter for Computational Molecular Biology, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island, United States of America.
Margaret SteinhoffDepartment of Pathology, Women and Infants' Hospital, Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island, United States of America.
Colin CollinsVancouver Prostate Centre, Vancouver, Canada.
Peter J S SmithInstitute for Life Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton, England.
Benjamin J RaphaelCenter for Computational Molecular Biology, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island, United States of America; Department of Computer Science, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island, United States of America.
Laurent BrardDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Southern Illinois University School of Medicine, Springfield, Illinois, United States of America.

Funding

VOLTAMMETRIC DETECTION OF METAL IONSP41RR001395 · NCRR · MARINE BIOLOGICAL LABORATORY · PI SMITH, PETER JS · 1985 to 2010
$12.7M
CENTER FOR CANCER SIGNALING NETWORKSP30RR031153 · NCRR · BROWN UNIVERSITY · PI ATWOOD, WALTER J · 2011 to 2011
$1.1M
Computational Characterization of Genetic HeterogeneityR01HG007069 · NHGRI · PRINCETON UNIVERSITY · PI RAPHAEL, BENJAMIN · 2013 to 2015
$1.1M
Shared High-throughput DNA sequencer for the Brown University CommunityS10RR027634 · NCRR · BROWN UNIVERSITY · PI WESSEL, GARY M · 2010 to 2010
$500k
NCRR NIH HHS 5P41RR001395NCRR NIH HHS P20RR0118/28NCRR NIH HHS P30 RR031153NCRR NIH HHS P30RR031153NCRR NIH HHS P41 RR001395NCRR NIH HHS S10 RR027634NCRR NIH HHS S10RR027634NHGRI NIH HHS R01 HG007069PHS HHS 2674-4/OHGB1623
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The behavior and genetics of serous epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) metastasis, the form of the disease lethal to patients, is poorly understood. The unique properties of metastases are critical to understand to improve treatments of the disease that remains in patients after debulking surgery. We sought to identify the genetic and phenotypic landscape of metastatic progression of EOC to understand how metastases compare to primary tumors. DNA copy number and mRNA expression differences between matched primary human tumors and omental metastases, collected at the same time during debulking surgery before chemotherapy, were measured using microarrays. qPCR and immunohistochemistry validated findings. Pathway analysis of mRNA expression revealed metastatic cancer cells are more proliferative and less apoptotic than primary tumors, perhaps explaining the aggressive nature of these lesions. Most cases had copy number aberrations (CNAs) that differed between primary and metastatic tumors, but we did not detect CNAs that are recurrent across cases. A six gene expression signature distinguishes primary from metastatic tumors and predicts overall survival in independent datasets. The genetic differences between primary and metastatic tumors, yet common expression changes, suggest that the major clone in metastases is not the same as in primary tumors, but the cancer cells adapt to the omentum similarly. Together, these data highlight how ovarian tumors develop into a distinct, more aggressive metastatic state that should be considered for therapy development.

Indexed as

Gene Expression ProfilingGene Expression Regulation, NeoplasticApoptosisCell ProliferationCluster AnalysisDNA Copy Number VariationsFemaleGenes, NeoplasmHumansNeoplasm MetastasisOmentumOvarian NeoplasmsPhenotypeRNA, MessengerRNA, Messenger

Identifiers

PMID24732363
PMCPMC3986100

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.