Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27260947›Full record

ArticleHuman pathology2016

Dicer expression in estrogen receptor-positive versus triple-negative breast cancer: an antibody comparison.

Nicole S Spoelstra, Diana M Cittelly, Jessica L Christenson, Michael A Gordon, Anthony Elias, Paul Jedlicka, Jennifer K Richer

Open access · greenAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Human pathology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 38% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Rare GermlineFrontiers in endocrinology · 2020
    Article
  6. Review
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 1 institution in 1 country.

Nicole S SpoelstraDepartment of Pathology, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, CO 80045.
Diana M CittellyDepartment of Pathology, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, CO 80045.
Jessica L ChristensonDepartment of Pathology, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, CO 80045.
Michael A GordonDepartment of Pathology, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, CO 80045.
Anthony EliasDivision of Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, CO 80045.
Paul JedlickaDepartment of Pathology, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, CO 80045.
Jennifer K RicherDepartment of Pathology, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, CO 80045. Electronic address: Jennifer.Richer@ucdenver.edu.
University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus · US

Funding

University of Colorado Cancer Center Support Grant - Lung Cancer Patient-Derived Xenografts with Autologous Human Immune SystemsP30CA046934 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO DENVER · PI James V Degregori · 1988 to 2026
$117.0M
Training Program in Cancer BiologyT32CA190216 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO DENVER · PI Craig T. Jordan · 2016 to 2026
$3.5M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA046934NCI NIH HHS T32 CA190216
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Dicer is an RNase III enzyme responsible for cleaving double-stranded RNAs into small interfering RNAs and microRNAs, which either target messenger RNA transcripts for degradation or inhibit translation. Dicer protein levels have been examined in breast cancer with contradictory results. Our goal was to resolve whether Dicer levels differ in breast cancer versus normal breast epithelium and between estrogen receptor-α-positive (ER+) or estrogen receptor-α-negative (ER-) primary breast cancers. We compared 3 different Dicer antibodies: Abcam 4A6, Abcam ab5818, and Sigma HPA000694, using immunohistochemistry and Western blot analyses. All 3 Dicer antibodies detected higher levels of Dicer in ER+ breast cancer cell lines versus ER-, and all 3 recognized exogenous overexpressed Dicer. In clinical specimens, all 3 antibodies detected higher Dicer in ER+ breast cancers versus triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) but had very different staining patterns by immunohistochemistry on the same tumor samples. Using the optimal antibody, ab5818, selected for its sensitivity and specificity, Dicer protein expression was significantly higher in ER+ versus TNBC clinical specimens of primary tumor (P<.0001, unpaired t test). Dicer was also significantly higher in adjacent normal breast epithelium versus TNBC (P<.0001, paired t test; n=18 pairs). Differences in antibody performance may explain contrasting results observed in the literature regarding Dicer protein in breast cancer. If Dicer becomes more clinically relevant as a prognostic indicator, further antibody optimization and standardization will be critical.

Indexed as

Antibody SpecificityImmunohistochemistryAdultAgedAnimalsAntibodiesBiomarkers, TumorBreast NeoplasmsCell Line, TumorDEAD-box RNA HelicasesErb-b2 Receptor Tyrosine KinasesFemaleHEK293 CellsHumansMiceMiddle AgedAntibodiesBiomarkers, TumorDEAD-box RNA HelicasesDICER1 protein, humanERBB2 protein, humanErb-b2 Receptor Tyrosine KinasesReceptors, EstrogenReceptors, ProgesteroneRibonuclease IIIBreast cancerDicerEstrogen receptorImmunohistochemistryTNBC

Identifiers

PMID27260947
PMCPMC5517318
OpenAlexW2413839170

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.