↓ Skip to main content

Comparative clinical utility of tumor genomic testing and cell-free DNA in metastatic breast cancer

Overview of attention for article published in Breast Cancer Research and Treatment, May 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (51st percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (56th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
44 Mendeley
Title
Comparative clinical utility of tumor genomic testing and cell-free DNA in metastatic breast cancer
Published in
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment, May 2017
DOI 10.1007/s10549-017-4257-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kara N. Maxwell, Danielle Soucier-Ernst, Emin Tahirovic, Andrea B. Troxel, Candace Clark, Michael Feldman, Christopher Colameco, Bijal Kakrecha, Melissa Langer, David Lieberman, Jennifer J. D. Morrissette, Matt R. Paul, Tien-chi Pan, Stephanie Yee, Natalie Shih, Erica Carpenter, Lewis A. Chodosh, Angela DeMichele

Abstract

Breast cancer metastases differ biologically from primary disease; therefore, metastatic biopsies may assist in treatment decision making. Commercial genomic testing of both tumor and circulating tumor DNA have become available clinically, but utility of these tests in breast cancer management remains unclear. Patients undergoing a clinically indicated metastatic tumor biopsy were consented to the ongoing METAMORPH registry. Tumor and blood were collected at the time of disease progression before subsequent therapy, and patients were followed for response on subsequent treatment. Tumor testing (n = 53) and concurrent cell-free DNA (n = 32) in a subset of patients was performed using CLIA-approved assays. The proportion of patients with a genomic alteration was lower in tumor than in blood (69 vs. 91%; p = 0.06). After restricting analysis to alterations covered on both platforms, 83% of tumor alterations were detected in blood, while 90% of blood alterations were detected in tumor. Mutational load specific for the panel genes was calculated for both tumor and blood. Time to progression on subsequent treatment was significantly shorter for patients whose tumors had high panel-specific mutational load (HR 0.31, 95% CI 0.12-0.78) or a TP53 mutation (HR 0.35, 95% CI 0.20-0.79), after adjusting for stage at presentation, hormone receptor status, prior treatment type, and number of lines of metastatic treatment. Treating oncologists must distinguish platform differences from true biological heterogeneity when comparing tumor and cfDNA genomic testing results. Tumor and concurrent cfDNA contribute unique genomic information in metastatic breast cancer patients, providing potentially useful biomarkers for aggressive metastatic disease.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 44 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 44 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 16%
Other 6 14%
Student > Bachelor 4 9%
Researcher 4 9%
Student > Postgraduate 3 7%
Other 9 20%
Unknown 11 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 25%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 10 23%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 9%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 2%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 2%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 15 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 06 June 2017.
All research outputs
#13,038,951
of 22,971,207 outputs
Outputs from Breast Cancer Research and Treatment
#2,836
of 4,675 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#148,909
of 310,149 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Breast Cancer Research and Treatment
#46
of 107 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,971,207 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,675 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.2. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 310,149 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 51% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 107 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 56% of its contemporaries.