↓ Skip to main content

Inherited DNA-Repair Gene Mutations in Men with Metastatic Prostate Cancer

Overview of attention for article published in New England Journal of Medicine, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (98th percentile)

Citations

dimensions_citation
1232 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
966 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
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
Inherited DNA-Repair Gene Mutations in Men with Metastatic Prostate Cancer
Published in
New England Journal of Medicine, July 2016
DOI 10.1056/nejmoa1603144
Pubmed ID
Authors

Colin C Pritchard, Joaquin Mateo, Michael F Walsh, Navonil De Sarkar, Wassim Abida, Himisha Beltran, Andrea Garofalo, Roman Gulati, Suzanne Carreira, Rosalind Eeles, Olivier Elemento, Mark A Rubin, Dan Robinson, Robert Lonigro, Maha Hussain, Arul Chinnaiyan, Jake Vinson, Julie Filipenko, Levi Garraway, Mary-Ellen Taplin, Saud AlDubayan, G Celine Han, Mallory Beightol, Colm Morrissey, Belinda Nghiem, Heather H Cheng, Bruce Montgomery, Tom Walsh, Silvia Casadei, Michael Berger, Liying Zhang, Ahmet Zehir, Joseph Vijai, Howard I Scher, Charles Sawyers, Nikolaus Schultz, Philip W Kantoff, David Solit, Mark Robson, Eliezer M Van Allen, Kenneth Offit, Johann de Bono, Peter S Nelson

Abstract

Background Inherited mutations in DNA-repair genes such as BRCA2 are associated with increased risks of lethal prostate cancer. Although the prevalence of germline mutations in DNA-repair genes among men with localized prostate cancer who are unselected for family predisposition is insufficient to warrant routine testing, the frequency of such mutations in patients with metastatic prostate cancer has not been established. Methods We recruited 692 men with documented metastatic prostate cancer who were unselected for family history of cancer or age at diagnosis. We isolated germline DNA and used multiplex sequencing assays to assess mutations in 20 DNA-repair genes associated with autosomal dominant cancer-predisposition syndromes. Results A total of 84 germline DNA-repair gene mutations that were presumed to be deleterious were identified in 82 men (11.8%); mutations were found in 16 genes, including BRCA2 (37 men [5.3%]), ATM (11 [1.6%]), CHEK2 (10 [1.9% of 534 men with data]), BRCA1 (6 [0.9%]), RAD51D (3 [0.4%]), and PALB2 (3 [0.4%]). Mutation frequencies did not differ according to whether a family history of prostate cancer was present or according to age at diagnosis. Overall, the frequency of germline mutations in DNA-repair genes among men with metastatic prostate cancer significantly exceeded the prevalence of 4.6% among 499 men with localized prostate cancer (P<0.001), including men with high-risk disease, and the prevalence of 2.7% in the Exome Aggregation Consortium, which includes 53,105 persons without a known cancer diagnosis (P<0.001). Conclusions In our multicenter study, the incidence of germline mutations in genes mediating DNA-repair processes among men with metastatic prostate cancer was 11.8%, which was significantly higher than the incidence among men with localized prostate cancer. The frequencies of germline mutations in DNA-repair genes among men with metastatic disease did not differ significantly according to age at diagnosis or family history of prostate cancer. (Funded by Stand Up To Cancer and others.).

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 378 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 966 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 3 <1%
Germany 2 <1%
United States 2 <1%
France 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Korea, Republic of 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
Unknown 954 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 155 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 109 11%
Other 85 9%
Student > Master 80 8%
Student > Bachelor 75 8%
Other 182 19%
Unknown 280 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 298 31%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 176 18%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 78 8%
Computer Science 12 1%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 1%
Other 72 7%
Unknown 319 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1259. 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 12 March 2024.
All research outputs
#10,970
of 25,736,439 outputs
Outputs from New England Journal of Medicine
#514
of 32,655 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#132
of 372,146 outputs
Outputs of similar age from New England Journal of Medicine
#5
of 302 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,736,439 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 32,655 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 122.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 372,146 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 302 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.