↓ Skip to main content

Breast cancer classification: linking molecular mechanisms to disease prognosis

Overview of attention for article published in Briefings in Bioinformatics, June 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (71st percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
9 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
57 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
216 Mendeley
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 classification: linking molecular mechanisms to disease prognosis
Published in
Briefings in Bioinformatics, June 2014
DOI 10.1093/bib/bbu020
Pubmed ID
Authors

Atefeh Taherian-Fard, Sriganesh Srihari, Mark A. Ragan

Abstract

Breast cancer was traditionally perceived as a single disease; however, recent advances in gene expression and genomic profiling have revealed that breast cancer is in fact a collection of diseases exhibiting distinct anatomical features, responses to treatment and survival outcomes. Consequently, a number of schemes have been proposed for subtyping of breast cancer to bring out the biological and clinically relevant characteristics of the subtypes. Although some of these schemes capture underlying molecular differences, others predict variations in response to treatment and survival patterns. However, despite this diversity in the approaches, it is clear that molecular mechanisms drive clinical outcomes, and therefore an effective scheme should integrate molecular as well as clinical parameters to enable deeper understanding of cancer mechanisms and allow better decision making in the clinic. Here, using a large cohort of ∼550 breast tumours from The Cancer Genome Atlas, we systematically evaluate a number of expression-based schemes including at least eight molecular pathways implicated in breast cancer and three prognostic signatures, across a variety of classification scenarios covering molecular characteristics, biomarker status, tumour stages and survival patterns. We observe that a careful combination of these schemes yields better classification results compared with using them individually, thus confirming that molecular mechanisms and clinical outcomes are related and that an effective scheme should therefore integrate both these parameters to enable a deeper understanding of the cancer.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 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 216 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Sweden 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
Egypt 1 <1%
Unknown 213 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 37 17%
Student > Bachelor 35 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 33 15%
Researcher 22 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 16 7%
Other 26 12%
Unknown 47 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 60 28%
Medicine and Dentistry 36 17%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 26 12%
Computer Science 13 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 9 4%
Other 18 8%
Unknown 54 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 20 May 2015.
All research outputs
#6,696,669
of 22,757,541 outputs
Outputs from Briefings in Bioinformatics
#945
of 2,595 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#64,108
of 228,326 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Briefings in Bioinformatics
#7
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,757,541 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,595 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% 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 228,326 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 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.