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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Comprehensive Molecular Portraits of Invasive Lobular Breast Cancer
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cell, October 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.cell.2015.09.033 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Giovanni Ciriello, Michael L. Gatza, Andrew H. Beck, Matthew D. Wilkerson, Suhn K. Rhie, Alessandro Pastore, Hailei Zhang, Michael McLellan, Christina Yau, Cyriac Kandoth, Reanne Bowlby, Hui Shen, Sikander Hayat, Robert Fieldhouse, Susan C. Lester, Gary M.K. Tse, Rachel E. Factor, Laura C. Collins, Kimberly H. Allison, Yunn-Yi Chen, Kristin Jensen, Nicole B. Johnson, Steffi Oesterreich, Gordon B. Mills, Andrew D. Cherniack, Gordon Robertson, Christopher Benz, Chris Sander, Peter W. Laird, Katherine A. Hoadley, Tari A. King, Charles M. Perou, Rehan Akbani, J. Todd Auman, Miruna Balasundaram, Saianand Balu, Thomas Barr, Andrew Beck, Christopher Benz, Stephen Benz, Mario Berrios, Rameen Beroukhim, Tom Bodenheimer, Lori Boice, Moiz S. Bootwalla, Jay Bowen, Reanne Bowlby, Denise Brooks, Andrew D. Cherniack, Lynda Chin, Juok Cho, Sudha Chudamani, Giovanni Ciriello, Tanja Davidsen, John A. Demchok, Jennifer B. Dennison, Li Ding, Ina Felau, Martin L. Ferguson, Scott Frazer, Stacey B. Gabriel, JianJiong Gao, Julie M. Gastier-Foster, Michael L. Gatza, Nils Gehlenborg, Mark Gerken, Gad Getz, William J. Gibson, D. Neil Hayes, David I. Heiman, Katherine A. Hoadley, Andrea Holbrook, Robert A. Holt, Alan P. Hoyle, Hai Hu, Mei Huang, Carolyn M. Hutter, E. Shelley Hwang, Stuart R. Jefferys, Steven J.M. Jones, Zhenlin Ju, Jaegil Kim, Phillip H. Lai, Peter W. Laird, Michael S. Lawrence, Kristen M. Leraas, Tara M. Lichtenberg, Pei Lin, Shiyun Ling, Jia Liu, Wenbin Liu, Laxmi Lolla, Yiling Lu, Yussanne Ma, Dennis T. Maglinte, Elaine Mardis, Jeffrey Marks, Marco A. Marra, Cynthia McAllister, Michael McLellan, Shaowu Meng, Matthew Meyerson, Gordon B. Mills, Richard A. Moore, Lisle E. Mose, Andrew J. Mungall, Bradley A. Murray, Rashi Naresh, Michael S. Noble, Steffi Oesterreich, Olufunmilayo Olopade, Joel S. Parker, Charles M. Perou, Todd Pihl, Gordon Saksena, Steven E. Schumacher, Kenna R. Mills Shaw, Nilsa C. Ramirez, W. Kimryn Rathmell, Suhn K. Rhie, Jeffrey Roach, A. Gordon Robertson, Gordon Saksena, Chris Sander, Jacqueline E. Schein, Nikolaus Schultz, Hui Shen, Margi Sheth, Yan Shi, Juliann Shih, Carl Simon Shelley, Craig Shriver, Janae V. Simons, Heidi J. Sofia, Matthew G. Soloway, Carrie Sougnez, Charlie Sun, Roy Tarnuzzer, Daniel G. Tiezzi, David J. Van Den Berg, Doug Voet, Yunhu Wan, Zhining Wang, John N. Weinstein, Daniel J. Weisenberger, Matthew D. Wilkerson, Richard Wilson, Lisa Wise, Maciej Wiznerowicz, Junyuan Wu, Ye Wu, Liming Yang, Christina Yau, Travis I. Zack, Jean C. Zenklusen, Hailei Zhang, Jiashan Zhang, Erik Zmuda |
| Abstract |
Invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC) is the second most prevalent histologic subtype of invasive breast cancer. Here, we comprehensively profiled 817 breast tumors, including 127 ILC, 490 ductal (IDC), and 88 mixed IDC/ILC. Besides E-cadherin loss, the best known ILC genetic hallmark, we identified mutations targeting PTEN, TBX3, and FOXA1 as ILC enriched features. PTEN loss associated with increased AKT phosphorylation, which was highest in ILC among all breast cancer subtypes. Spatially clustered FOXA1 mutations correlated with increased FOXA1 expression and activity. Conversely, GATA3 mutations and high expression characterized luminal A IDC, suggesting differential modulation of ER activity in ILC and IDC. Proliferation and immune-related signatures determined three ILC transcriptional subtypes associated with survival differences. Mixed IDC/ILC cases were molecularly classified as ILC-like and IDC-like revealing no true hybrid features. This multidimensional molecular atlas sheds new light on the genetic bases of ILC and provides potential clinical options. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 36 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 11 | 31% |
| United Kingdom | 3 | 8% |
| Ireland | 2 | 6% |
| Australia | 2 | 6% |
| Bosnia and Herzegovina | 1 | 3% |
| Spain | 1 | 3% |
| Greece | 1 | 3% |
| Belgium | 1 | 3% |
| Canada | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 13 | 36% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 22 | 61% |
| Scientists | 10 | 28% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 4 | 11% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 1,160 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 6 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 6 | <1% |
| France | 2 | <1% |
| Japan | 2 | <1% |
| China | 2 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Finland | 1 | <1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| Norway | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 4 | <1% |
| Unknown | 1134 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 236 | 20% |
| Researcher | 226 | 19% |
| Student > Bachelor | 102 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 99 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 60 | 5% |
| Other | 187 | 16% |
| Unknown | 250 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 323 | 28% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 213 | 18% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 190 | 16% |
| Computer Science | 43 | 4% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 19 | 2% |
| Other | 93 | 8% |
| Unknown | 279 | 24% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 58. 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 11 July 2023.
All research outputs
#743,776
of 25,837,817 outputs
Outputs from Cell
#3,217
of 17,278 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#10,616
of 290,121 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cell
#41
of 174 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,837,817 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 17,278 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 59.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% 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 290,121 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 174 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.