Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26622803›Full record

ArticleOncology letters2015

Comparative genomic hybridization analysis of invasive ductal breast carcinomas in the Chinese population.

Jianwei Zhang, Hongyan Zhang, Xin Xu, Mingrong Wang, Zhonghe Yu

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Oncology letters, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 94% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Jianwei ZhangDepartment of Oncology, Beijing Army General Hospital, Beijing 100700, P.R. China.
Hongyan ZhangDepartment of Oncology, Beijing Army General Hospital, Beijing 100700, P.R. China.
Xin XuNational Laboratory of Molecular Oncology, Cancer Institute, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100021, P.R. China.
Mingrong WangNational Laboratory of Molecular Oncology, Cancer Institute, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100021, P.R. China.
Zhonghe YuDepartment of Oncology, Beijing Army General Hospital, Beijing 100700, P.R. China.
The Military General Hospital of Beijing PLA · CNChinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Breast cancer is the most common malignancy in Chinese women. The aim of the present study was to investigate the genetic alterations that occur in breast cancer cells in Chinese women. Comparative genomic hybridization (CGH) analysis was performed on 34 tumors obtained from patients with primary invasive ductal breast carcinoma (IDC). Recurrent genetic alterations in breast cancer include gains on chromosomes 1q (59%), 16p (50%), 17q (44%), 8q (38%), 11q (32%), 20q (32%), 1p (24%), 20p (24%), 19q (21%) and 19p (18%). Losses are common on chromosomes 6q (15%), 8p (12%), 18 (12%), 4q (9%), X (9%) and 17p (9%). In the present study, high-level amplifications were observed on chromosomes 1q32, 8p, 11q13, 17q and 20q. Overall, the chromosomal DNA gains observed were consistent with the changes reported in Caucasian populations. However, the incidence of chromosomal DNA loss was lower in the present study compared with the incidence reported in the literature. The present results demonstrate the pattern of chromosomal imbalances in the invasive ductal breast carcinomas of Chinese females.

Indexed as

comparative genomic hybridizationcopy number changesductal breast carcinomas

Identifiers

PMID26622803
PMCPMC4579858
OpenAlexW2148964509

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.