| Title |
miRpower: a web-tool to validate survival-associated miRNAs utilizing expression data from 2178 breast cancer patients
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment, October 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10549-016-4013-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
András Lánczky, Ádám Nagy, Giulia Bottai, Gyöngyi Munkácsy, András Szabó, Libero Santarpia, Balázs Győrffy |
| Abstract |
The proper validation of prognostic biomarkers is an important clinical issue in breast cancer research. MicroRNAs (miRNAs) have emerged as a new class of promising breast cancer biomarkers. In the present work, we developed an integrated online bioinformatic tool to validate the prognostic relevance of miRNAs in breast cancer. A database was set up by searching the GEO, EGA, TCGA, and PubMed repositories to identify datasets with published miRNA expression and clinical data. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was performed to validate the prognostic value of a set of 41 previously published survival-associated miRNAs. All together 2178 samples from four independent datasets were integrated into the system including the expression of 1052 distinct human miRNAs. In addition, the web-tool allows for the selection of patients, which can be filtered by receptors status, lymph node involvement, histological grade, and treatments. The complete analysis tool can be accessed online at: www.kmplot.com/mirpower . We used this tool to analyze a large number of deregulated miRNAs associated with breast cancer features and outcome, and confirmed the prognostic value of 26 miRNAs. A significant correlation in three out of four datasets was validated only for miR-29c and miR-101. In summary, we established an integrated platform capable to mine all available miRNA data to perform a survival analysis for the identification and validation of prognostic miRNA markers in breast cancer. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 183 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 183 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 35 | 19% |
| Researcher | 24 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 24 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 23 | 13% |
| Professor | 6 | 3% |
| Other | 24 | 13% |
| Unknown | 47 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 53 | 29% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 22 | 12% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 17 | 9% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 6 | 3% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 5 | 3% |
| Other | 23 | 13% |
| Unknown | 57 | 31% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 17 February 2022.
All research outputs
#4,787,250
of 23,138,859 outputs
Outputs from Breast Cancer Research and Treatment
#903
of 4,691 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#79,751
of 320,389 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Breast Cancer Research and Treatment
#16
of 73 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,138,859 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 76th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,691 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% 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 320,389 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 73 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.