ArticleOncotarget2015
Prognostic value of a 92-probe signature in breast cancer.
Article in Oncotarget, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Blood-based epigenome-wide analyses of 19 common disease states: A longitudinal, population-based linked cohort study of 18,413 Scottish individuals.PLoS medicine · 2023Review
- TOR1B: a predictor of bone metastasis in breast cancer patients.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Review
- Secreted breast tumor interstitial fluid microRNAs and their target genes are associated with triple-negative breast cancer, tumor grade, and immune infiltration.Breast cancer research : BCR · 2020Article
- The Prognostic 97 Chemoresponse Gene Signature in Ovarian Cancer.Scientific reports · 2017Article
- An 8-gene signature for prediction of prognosis and chemoresponse in non-small cell lung cancer.Oncotarget · 2016Article
- Article
- Article
- CRC-113 gene expression signature for predicting prognosis in patients with colorectal cancer.Oncotarget · 2015Article
- ADAM12 expression predicts clinical outcome in estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer.International journal of clinical and experimental pathology · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
20 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Clinical applications of gene expression signatures in breast cancer prognosis still remain limited due to poor predictive strength of single training datasets and appropriate invariable platforms. We proposed a gene expression signature by reducing baseline differences and analyzing common probes among three recent Affymetrix U133 plus 2 microarray data sets. Using a newly developed supervised method, a 92-probe signature found in this study was associated with overall survival. It was robustly validated in four independent data sets and then repeated on three subgroups by incorporating 17 breast cancer microarray datasets. The signature was an independent predictor of patients' survival in univariate analysis [(HR) 1.927, 95% CI (1.237-3.002); p < 0.01] as well as multivariate analysis after adjustment of clinical variables [(HR) 7.125, 95% CI (2.462-20.618); p < 0.001]. Consistent predictive performance was found in different multivariate models in increased patient population (p = 0.002). The survival signature predicted a late metastatic feature through 5-year disease free survival (p = 0.006). We identified subtypes within the lymph node positive (p < 0.001) and ER positive (p = 0.01) patients that best reflected the invasive breast cancer biology. In conclusion using the Common Probe Approach, we present a novel prognostic signature as a predictor in breast cancer late recurrences.
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.