↓ Skip to main content

Breast cancer genome and transcriptome integration implicates specific mutational signatures with immune cell infiltration

Overview of attention for article published in Nature Communications, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (93rd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (62nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
twitter
33 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
99 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
206 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Breast cancer genome and transcriptome integration implicates specific mutational signatures with immune cell infiltration
Published in
Nature Communications, September 2016
DOI 10.1038/ncomms12910
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marcel Smid, F. Germán Rodríguez-González, Anieta M. Sieuwerts, Roberto Salgado, Wendy J. C. Prager-Van der Smissen, Michelle van der Vlugt-Daane, Anne van Galen, Serena Nik-Zainal, Johan Staaf, Arie B. Brinkman, Marc J. van de Vijver, Andrea L. Richardson, Aquila Fatima, Kim Berentsen, Adam Butler, Sancha Martin, Helen R. Davies, Reno Debets, Marion E. Meijer-Van Gelder, Carolien H. M. van Deurzen, Gaëtan MacGrogan, Gert G. G. M. Van den Eynden, Colin Purdie, Alastair M. Thompson, Carlos Caldas, Paul N. Span, Peter T. Simpson, Sunil R. Lakhani, Steven Van Laere, Christine Desmedt, Markus Ringnér, Stefania Tommasi, Jorunn Eyford, Annegien Broeks, Anne Vincent-Salomon, P. Andrew Futreal, Stian Knappskog, Tari King, Gilles Thomas, Alain Viari, Anita Langerød, Anne-Lise Børresen-Dale, Ewan Birney, Hendrik G. Stunnenberg, Mike Stratton, John A. Foekens, John W. M. Martens

Abstract

A recent comprehensive whole genome analysis of a large breast cancer cohort was used to link known and novel drivers and substitution signatures to the transcriptome of 266 cases. Here, we validate that subtype-specific aberrations show concordant expression changes for, for example, TP53, PIK3CA, PTEN, CCND1 and CDH1. We find that CCND3 expression levels do not correlate with amplification, while increased GATA3 expression in mutant GATA3 cancers suggests GATA3 is an oncogene. In luminal cases the total number of substitutions, irrespective of type, associates with cell cycle gene expression and adverse outcome, whereas the number of mutations of signatures 3 and 13 associates with immune-response specific gene expression, increased numbers of tumour-infiltrating lymphocytes and better outcome. Thus, while earlier reports imply that the sheer number of somatic aberrations could trigger an immune-response, our data suggests that substitutions of a particular type are more effective in doing so than others.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 33 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 206 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Australia 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 201 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 53 26%
Student > Ph. D. Student 37 18%
Student > Master 24 12%
Other 18 9%
Student > Bachelor 12 6%
Other 32 16%
Unknown 30 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 70 34%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 42 20%
Medicine and Dentistry 33 16%
Computer Science 8 4%
Immunology and Microbiology 8 4%
Other 8 4%
Unknown 37 18%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 35. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 July 2017.
All research outputs
#1,088,380
of 24,330,936 outputs
Outputs from Nature Communications
#17,021
of 51,983 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#20,462
of 327,934 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature Communications
#334
of 886 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,330,936 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 51,983 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 56.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 327,934 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 886 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its contemporaries.