ArticleOncotarget2021
Quantitative proteome profiling stratifies fibroepithelial lesions of the breast.
Article in Oncotarget, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- From Proteomics to Pathology: S100A8's Impact on Breast Phyllodes Tumors Grading.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Article
- GCNT3 and ST3GAL1 expression correlates with HER2 status and MUC1/β-catenin/Cyclin D1 axis in breast cancer.BMC cancer · 2026Article
- Integrating single-cell and spatial transcriptomes reveals COL4A1/2 facilitates the spatial organisation of stromal cells differentiation in breast phyllodes tumours.Clinical and translational medicine · 2024Article
- MicroRNA signatures differentiate types, grades, and stages of breast invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC): miRNA-target interacting signaling pathways.Cell communication and signaling : CCS · 2024Article
- Gene Expression Profiling of Fibroepithelial Lesions of the Breast.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Article
- Integrated proteomics and phosphoproteomics revealed druggable kinases in neoadjuvant chemotherapy resistant tongue cancer.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Breast fibroepithelial lesions (FELs) include heterogeneous pathological tumors, involving indolent fibroadenoma (FAD) to potentially aggressive phyllodes tumors (PTs). The current grading system remains unreliable in differentiating these tumors due to histological heterogeneity and lack of appropriate markers to monitor the sudden and unpredictable malignant transformation of PTs. Thus, there exists an imminent need for a marker-based diagnostic approach to augment the conventional histological platform that could lead to accurate diagnosis and distinction of FELs. The high- throughput quantitative proteomic analysis suggested that FAD and PTs form distinct clusters away from borderline and malignant though there exist marked differences between them. Interestingly, over-expression of extracellular matrices (ECM) related proteins and epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT) markers in borderline PTs led us to hypothesize a model of deposition and degradation leading to ECM remodeling and EMT acquisition triggering its malignant transformation. We also identified three candidate biomarkers such as MUCL1, HTRA1, and VEGDF uniquely expressed in FAD, borderline, and malignant PTs, respectively, which were further validated using immunohistochemistry. The present work shed light on a brief mechanistic framework of PTs aggressive nature and present potential biomarkers to differentiate overlapping FELs that would be of practical utility in augmenting existing diagnosis and disease management for this rare tumor.
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.