↓ Skip to main content

Breast cancer complexity: implications of intratumoral heterogeneity in clinical management

Overview of attention for article published in Cancer and Metastasis Reviews, July 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
55 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
60 Mendeley
Title
Breast cancer complexity: implications of intratumoral heterogeneity in clinical management
Published in
Cancer and Metastasis Reviews, July 2017
DOI 10.1007/s10555-017-9684-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Brittany Haynes, Ashapurna Sarma, Pratima Nangia-Makker, Malathy P. Shekhar

Abstract

Generation of intratumoral phenotypic and genetic heterogeneity has been attributed to clonal evolution and cancer stem cells that together give rise to a tumor with complex ecosystems. Each ecosystem contains various tumor cell subpopulations and stromal entities, which, depending upon their composition, can influence survival, therapy responses, and global growth of the tumor. Despite recent advances in breast cancer management, the disease has not been completely eradicated as tumors recur despite initial response to treatment. In this review, using data from clinically relevant breast cancer models, we show that the fates of tumor stem cells/progenitor cells in the individual tumor ecosystems comprising a tumor are predetermined to follow a limited (unipotent) and/or unlimited (multipotent) path of differentiation which create conditions for active generation and maintenance of heterogeneity. The resultant dynamic systems respond differently to treatments, thus disrupting the delicate stability maintained in the heterogeneous tumor. This raises the question whether it is better then to preserve stability by preventing takeover by otherwise dormant ecosystems in the tumor following therapy. The ultimate strategy for personalized therapy would require serial assessments of the patient's tumor for biomarker validation during the entire course of treatment that is combined with their three-dimensional mapping to the tumor architecture and landscape.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 60 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 60 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 18%
Student > Master 7 12%
Student > Bachelor 7 12%
Researcher 5 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 7%
Other 10 17%
Unknown 16 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 16 27%
Medicine and Dentistry 11 18%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 7%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 5%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 3%
Other 6 10%
Unknown 18 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 09 August 2017.
All research outputs
#20,441,465
of 22,996,001 outputs
Outputs from Cancer and Metastasis Reviews
#740
of 813 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#277,015
of 317,332 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cancer and Metastasis Reviews
#21
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,996,001 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 813 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.6. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 317,332 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.