↓ Skip to main content

DNA methylation profiling in the Carolina Breast Cancer Study defines cancer subclasses differing in clinicopathologic characteristics and survival

Overview of attention for article published in Breast Cancer Research, October 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
73 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
111 Mendeley
Title
DNA methylation profiling in the Carolina Breast Cancer Study defines cancer subclasses differing in clinicopathologic characteristics and survival
Published in
Breast Cancer Research, October 2014
DOI 10.1186/s13058-014-0450-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kathleen Conway, Sharon N Edmiston, Ryan May, Pei Fen Kuan, Haitao Chu, Christopher Bryant, Chiu-Kit Tse, Theresa Swift-Scanlan, Joseph Geradts, Melissa A Troester, Robert C Millikan

Abstract

IntroductionBreast cancer is a heterogeneous disease, with several intrinsic subtypes differing by hormone receptor (HR) status, molecular profiles and prognosis. However, the role of DNA methylation in breast cancer development and progression, and its relationship with the intrinsic tumor subtypes is not fully understood.MethodsA microarray targeting promoters of cancer-related genes was used to evaluate DNA methylation at 935 CpG sites in 517 breast tumors from the Carolina Breast Cancer Study (CBCS), a population-based study of invasive breast cancer.ResultsConsensus clustering using methylation (ß) values for the 167 most variant CpG loci defined 4 clusters differing most distinctly in hormone receptor (HR) status, intrinsic subtype (luminal versus basal-like) and p53 mutation status. Supervised analyses for HR status, subtype, and p53 status identified 266 differentially methylated CpG loci with considerable overlap. Genes relatively hypermethylated in HR+, luminal A, or p53 wildtype breast cancers included FABP3, FGF2, FZD9, GAS7, HDAC9, HOXA11, MME, PAX6, POMC, PTGS2, RASSF1, RBP1, and SCGB3A1, while those more highly methylated in HR-, basal-like or p53 mutant tumors included BCR, C4B, DAB2IP, MEST, RARA, SEPT5, TFF1, THY1 and SERPINA5. Clustering also defined a hypermethylated luminal-enriched tumor cluster 3 that gene ontology analysis revealed to be enriched for homeobox and other developmental genes (ASCL2, DLK1, EYA4, GAS7, HOXA5, HOXA9, HOXB13, IHH, IPF1, ISL1, PAX6, TBX1, SOX1, SOX17). Although basal-enriched cluster 2 showed worse short-term survival, the luminal-enriched cluster 3 showed worse long-term survival, but was not independently prognostic in multivariate Cox proportional hazard analysis likely due to the mostly early stage cases in this dataset.ConclusionsThis study demonstrates that epigenetic patterns are strongly associated with HR status, subtype, and p53 mutation status, and may show heterogeneity within tumor subclass. Among HR+¿breast tumors, a subset exhibiting a gene signature characterized by hypermethylation of developmental genes and poorer clinicopathologic features may have prognostic value, and requires further study. Genes differentially methylated between clinically-important tumor subsets have roles in differentiation, development, and tumor growth and may be critical to establishing and maintaining tumor phenotypes and clinical outcomes.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 111 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 2 2%
Netherlands 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 106 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 21 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 14%
Student > Master 12 11%
Student > Bachelor 12 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 10%
Other 22 20%
Unknown 17 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 27 24%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 23 21%
Medicine and Dentistry 21 19%
Mathematics 5 5%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 3%
Other 10 9%
Unknown 22 20%
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 15 October 2014.
All research outputs
#15,092,197
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Breast Cancer Research
#1,321
of 2,053 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#133,071
of 267,623 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Breast Cancer Research
#25
of 46 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,053 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.2. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% 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 267,623 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 46 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.