Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30832597›Full record

ArticleBMC cancer2019

The neoepitope landscape of breast cancer: implications for immunotherapy.

Pooja Narang, Meixuan Chen, Amit A Sharma, Karen S Anderson, Melissa A Wilson

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC cancer, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 62 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
62citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.1field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

62 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 98 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Public neoantigens in breast cancer immunotherapy (Review).International journal of molecular medicine · 2024
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

2 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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Pooja NarangSchool of Life Sciences, Arizona State University, PO Box 874501, Tempe, AZ, 85287-4501, USA.
Meixuan ChenSchool of Life Sciences, Arizona State University, PO Box 874501, Tempe, AZ, 85287-4501, USA.
Amit A SharmaCenter for Personalized Diagnostics, The Biodesign Institute, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, USA.
Karen S AndersonSchool of Life Sciences, Arizona State University, PO Box 874501, Tempe, AZ, 85287-4501, USA. karen.anderson.1@asu.edu.
Melissa A WilsonSchool of Life Sciences, Arizona State University, PO Box 874501, Tempe, AZ, 85287-4501, USA. mwilsons@asu.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2614-0285
Arizona State University · US

Funding

School of Life Sciences and The Biodesign Institute at Arizona State University startup
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCancer immunotherapy with immune checkpoint blockade (CKB) is now standard of care for multiple cancers. The clinical response to CKB is associated with T cell immunity targeting cancer-induced mutations that generate novel HLA-binding epitopes (neoepitopes).

methodsHere, we developed a rapid bioinformatics pipeline and filtering strategy, EpitopeHunter, to identify and prioritize clinically relevant neoepitopes from the landscape of somatic mutations. We used the pipeline to determine the frequency of neoepitopes from the TCGA dataset of invasive breast cancers. We predicted HLA class I-binding neoepitopes for 870 breast cancer samples and filtered the neoepitopes based on tumor transcript abundance.

resultsWe found that the total mutational burden (TMB) was highest for triple-negative breast cancer, TNBC, (median = 63 mutations, range: 2-765); followed by HER-2(+) (median = 39 mutations, range: 1-1206); and lowest for ER/PR(+)HER-2(-) (median = 32 mutations, range: 1-2860). 40% of the nonsynonymous mutations led to the generation of predicted neoepitopes. The neoepitope load (NEL) is highly correlated with the mutational burden (R

conclusionsOnly half (51%) of the predicted neoepitopes are expressed at the RNA level (FPKM≥2), indicating the importance of assessing whether neoepitopes are transcribed. However, of all patients, 93% have at least one expressed predicted neoepitope, indicating that most breast cancer patients have the potential for neo-epitope targeted immunotherapy.

Indexed as

Antigens, NeoplasmBreast NeoplasmsComputational BiologyEpitopesErb-b2 Receptor Tyrosine KinasesFemaleHLA AntigensHumansImmunotherapyMiddle AgedMutationReceptors, EstrogenReceptors, ProgesteroneT-LymphocytesTriple Negative Breast NeoplasmsAntigens, NeoplasmEpitopesERBB2 protein, humanErb-b2 Receptor Tyrosine KinasesHLA AntigensReceptors, EstrogenReceptors, ProgesteroneBreast cancerEpitopesImmunotherapyMutation burdenNeoepitope predictionTNBC

Identifiers

PMID30832597
PMCPMC6399957
OpenAlexW2920349603

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.