↓ Skip to main content

Dual roles for immune metagenes in breast cancer prognosis and therapy prediction

Overview of attention for article published in Genome Medicine, October 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
45 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
55 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
Dual roles for immune metagenes in breast cancer prognosis and therapy prediction
Published in
Genome Medicine, October 2014
DOI 10.1186/s13073-014-0080-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Angela Alistar, Jeff W Chou, Srikanth Nagalla, Michael A Black, Ralph D’Agostino, Lance D Miller

Abstract

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer leads to considerable variability in clinical responses, with only 10 to 20% of cases achieving complete pathologic responses (pCR). Biological and clinical factors that determine the extent of pCR are incompletely understood. Mounting evidence indicates that the patient's immune system contributes to tumor regression and can be modulated by therapies. The cell types most frequently observed with this association are effector tumor infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs), such as cytotoxic T cells, natural killer cells and B cells. We and others have shown that the relative abundance of TILs in breast cancer can be quantified by intratumoral transcript levels of coordinately expressed, immune cell-specific genes. Through expression microarray analysis, we recently discovered three immune gene signatures, or metagenes, that appear to reflect the relative abundance of distinct tumor-infiltrating leukocyte populations. The B/P (B cell/plasma cell), T/NK (T cell/natural killer cell) and M/D (monocyte/dendritic cell) immune metagenes were significantly associated with distant metastasis-free survival of patients with highly proliferative cancer of the basal-like, HER2-enriched and luminal B intrinsic subtypes.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 55 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 1 2%
Australia 1 2%
Unknown 53 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 17 31%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 24%
Other 5 9%
Student > Postgraduate 3 5%
Professor 2 4%
Other 6 11%
Unknown 9 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 16 29%
Medicine and Dentistry 12 22%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 10 18%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 2%
Decision Sciences 1 2%
Other 1 2%
Unknown 14 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 25 November 2014.
All research outputs
#13,416,718
of 22,771,140 outputs
Outputs from Genome Medicine
#1,227
of 1,437 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#124,502
of 260,387 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genome Medicine
#48
of 57 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,771,140 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,437 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 25.7. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% 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 260,387 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 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 57 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.