↓ Skip to main content

Using the MCF10A/MCF10CA1a Breast Cancer Progression Cell Line Model to Investigate the Effect of Active, Mutant Forms of EGFR in Breast Cancer Development and Treatment Using Gefitinib

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, May 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
27 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
175 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
Using the MCF10A/MCF10CA1a Breast Cancer Progression Cell Line Model to Investigate the Effect of Active, Mutant Forms of EGFR in Breast Cancer Development and Treatment Using Gefitinib
Published in
PLOS ONE, May 2015
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0125232
Pubmed ID
Authors

Darrell C. Bessette, Erik Tilch, Tatjana Seidens, Michael C. J. Quinn, Adrian P. Wiegmans, Wei Shi, Sibylle Cocciardi, Amy McCart-Reed, Jodi M. Saunus, Peter T. Simpson, Sean M. Grimmond, Sunil R. Lakhani, Kum Kum Khanna, Nic Waddell, Fares Al-Ejeh, Georgia Chenevix-Trench

Abstract

Basal-like and triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) share common molecular features, poor prognosis and a propensity for metastasis to the brain. Amplification of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) occurs in ~50% of basal-like breast cancer, and mutations in the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) have been reported in up to ~ 10% of Asian TNBC patients. In non-small cell lung cancer several different mutations in the EGFR tyrosine kinase domain confer sensitivity to receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors, but the tumourigenic potential of EGFR mutations in breast cells and their potential for targeted therapy is unknown. Constructs containing wild type, G719S or E746-A750 deletion mutant forms of EGFR were transfected into the MCF10A breast cells and their tumorigenic derivative, MCF10CA1a. The effects of EGFR over-expression and mutation on proliferation, migration, invasion, response to gefitinib, and tumour formation in vivo was investigated. Copy number analysis and whole exome sequencing of the MCF10A and MCF10CA1a cell lines were also performed. Mutant EGFR increased MCF10A and MCF10CA1a proliferation and MCF10A gefitinib sensitivity. The EGFR-E746-A750 deletion increased MCF10CA1a cell migration and invasion, and greatly increased MCF10CA1a xenograft tumour formation and growth. Compared to MCF10A cells, MCF10CA1a cells exhibited large regions of gain on chromosomes 3 and 9, deletion on chromosome 7, and mutations in many genes implicated in cancer. Mutant EGFR enhances the oncogenic properties of MCF10A cell line, and increases sensitivity to gefitinib. Although the addition of EGFR E746-A750 renders the MCF10CA1a cells more tumourigenic in vivo it is not accompanied by increased gefitinib sensitivity, perhaps due to additional mutations, including the PIK3CA H1047R mutation, that the MCF10CA1a cell line has acquired. Screening TNBC/basal-like breast cancer for EGFR mutations may prove useful for directing therapy but, as in non-small cell lung cancer, accompanying mutations in PIK3CA may confer gefitinib resistance.

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 175 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 174 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 28 16%
Researcher 25 14%
Student > Bachelor 23 13%
Student > Master 16 9%
Other 16 9%
Other 29 17%
Unknown 38 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 42 24%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 40 23%
Medicine and Dentistry 17 10%
Engineering 9 5%
Chemistry 7 4%
Other 16 9%
Unknown 44 25%
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 06 February 2016.
All research outputs
#15,333,503
of 22,805,349 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#130,824
of 194,654 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#156,510
of 264,546 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#4,247
of 6,862 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,805,349 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 194,654 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.1. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% 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 264,546 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6,862 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.