Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27861902›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of pathology2017

The molecular basis of breast cancer pathological phenotypes.

Yujing J Heng, Susan C Lester, Gary Mk Tse, Rachel E Factor, Kimberly H Allison, Laura C Collins, Yunn-Yi Chen, Kristin C Jensen, Nicole B Johnson, Jong Cheol Jeong and 19 more

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of pathology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 65 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
65citing papers in PubMed
4.5field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

65 citing papers in PubMed, 111 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. The VEGF-Hypoxia Signature Is Upregulated in Basal-like Breast Tumors from Women of African Ancestry and Associated with Poor Outcomes in Breast Cancer.Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research · 2024
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Potential biomarkers as a predictive factor of response to primary chemotherapy in breast cancer patients.Brazilian journal of medical and biological research = Revista brasileira de pesquisas medicas e biologica · 2024
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Lack of Association ofGenetics research · 2023
    Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

5 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

29 authors at 18 institutions in 6 countries.

Yujing J HengCancer Research Institute, Beth Israel Deaconess Cancer Center, Boston, MA, USA.
Susan C LesterDepartment of Pathology, Harvard Medical School, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
Gary Mk TseDepartment of Anatomical & Cellular Pathology, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Prince of Wales Hospital, Shatin, NT, Hong Kong.
Rachel E FactorDepartment of Pathology, School of Medicine, Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
Kimberly H AllisonDepartment of Pathology, School of Medicine, Stanford Medical Center, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
Laura C CollinsCancer Research Institute, Beth Israel Deaconess Cancer Center, Boston, MA, USA.
Yunn-Yi ChenDepartment of Pathology, School of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Kristin C JensenDepartment of Pathology, School of Medicine, Stanford Medical Center, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
Nicole B JohnsonCancer Research Institute, Beth Israel Deaconess Cancer Center, Boston, MA, USA.
Jong Cheol JeongCancer Research Institute, Beth Israel Deaconess Cancer Center, Boston, MA, USA.
Rahi PunjabiCancer Research Institute, Beth Israel Deaconess Cancer Center, Boston, MA, USA.
Sandra J ShinDepartment of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA.
Kamaljeet SinghDepartment of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine, Brown University, Providence, RI, USA.
Gregor KringsDepartment of Pathology, School of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, CA, USA.
David A EberhardDepartment of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine, School of Medicine, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Puay Hoon TanDepartment of Pathology, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore.
Konstanty KorskiDepartment of Pathology, Greater Poland Cancer Centre, Poznan, Poland.
Frederic M WaldmanDepartment of Laboratory Medicine, School of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, CA, USA.
David A GutmanDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, School of Medicine, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Melinda SandersDepartment of Pathology, Microbiology and Immunology, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA.
Jorge S Reis-FilhoDepartment of Pathology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
Sydney R FlanaganCancer Research Institute, Beth Israel Deaconess Cancer Center, Boston, MA, USA.
Deena Ma GendooPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Gregory M ChenPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Benjamin Haibe-KainsPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Giovanni CirielloDepartment of Medical Genetics, University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Katherine A HoadleyDepartment of Genetics, School of Medicine, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Charles M PerouDepartment of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine, School of Medicine, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Andrew H BeckCancer Research Institute, Beth Israel Deaconess Cancer Center, Boston, MA, USA.
Harvard University · USBeth Israel Deaconess Medical Center · USUniversity of California, San Francisco · USUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel Hill · USPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre · CABrown University · USChinese University of Hong Kong · CNCornell University · USEmory University · USGreater Poland Cancer Center · PLHuntsman Cancer Institute · USMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center · USSingapore General Hospital · SGStanford Medicine · USUniversity Health Network · CAUniversity of Lausanne · CHVanderbilt University · USVA Palo Alto Health Care System · US

Funding

X-RAY CRYSTALLOGRAPHYP30CA008748 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RES · PI Nicholas D Socci · 1985 to 2026
$347.4M
Virology Research Program (Program 4)P30CA016086 · NCI · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI Deborah F. Tate · 1985 to 2026
$201.5M
Tissue Procurement & PathologyP50CA058223 · NCI · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI KATHERINE A. HOADLEY · 1992 to 2026
$59.3M
UNC-CH CENTER FOR ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH &SUSCEPTIBILITYP30ES010126 · NIEHS · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI Melissa A. Troester · 2001 to 2026
$36.3M
Tissue and Pathology CoreP50CA168504 · NCI · DANA-FARBER CANCER INST · PI MYLES A BROWN · 2013 to 2026
$30.1M
INFORMATICS METHODS AND MODELS FOR COMPUTATIONAL PATHOLOGYK22LM011931 · NLM · BETH ISRAEL DEACONESS MEDICAL CENTER · PI BECK, ANDREW H · 2014 to 2016
$476k
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA008748NCI NIH HHS P30 CA016086NCI NIH HHS P50 CA058223NCI NIH HHS P50 CA168504NIEHS NIH HHS P30 ES010126NLM NIH HHS K22 LM011931
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The histopathological evaluation of morphological features in breast tumours provides prognostic information to guide therapy. Adjunct molecular analyses provide further diagnostic, prognostic and predictive information. However, there is limited knowledge of the molecular basis of morphological phenotypes in invasive breast cancer. This study integrated genomic, transcriptomic and protein data to provide a comprehensive molecular profiling of morphological features in breast cancer. Fifteen pathologists assessed 850 invasive breast cancer cases from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA). Morphological features were significantly associated with genomic alteration, DNA methylation subtype, PAM50 and microRNA subtypes, proliferation scores, gene expression and/or reverse-phase protein assay subtype. Marked nuclear pleomorphism, necrosis, inflammation and a high mitotic count were associated with the basal-like subtype, and had a similar molecular basis. Omics-based signatures were constructed to predict morphological features. The association of morphology transcriptome signatures with overall survival in oestrogen receptor (ER)-positive and ER-negative breast cancer was first assessed by use of the Molecular Taxonomy of Breast Cancer International Consortium (METABRIC) dataset; signatures that remained prognostic in the METABRIC multivariate analysis were further evaluated in five additional datasets. The transcriptomic signature of poorly differentiated epithelial tubules was prognostic in ER-positive breast cancer. No signature was prognostic in ER-negative breast cancer. This study provided new insights into the molecular basis of breast cancer morphological phenotypes. The integration of morphological with molecular data has the potential to refine breast cancer classification, predict response to therapy, enhance our understanding of breast cancer biology, and improve clinical management. This work is publicly accessible at www.dx.ai/tcga_breast. Copyright © 2016 Pathological Society of Great Britain and Ireland. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Indexed as

Biomarkers, TumorBreast NeoplasmsDatabases, GeneticFemaleGene Expression ProfilingGenomicsHumansNeoplasm InvasivenessPhenotypeReceptors, EstrogenBiomarkers, TumorReceptors, Estrogenbioinformaticsepithelial tubule formationgenomicshistological grademRNAPAM50TCGA

Identifiers

PMID27861902
PMCPMC5499709
OpenAlexW2557953210

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.