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 |
Centrosome amplification induces high grade features and is prognostic of worse outcomes in breast cancer
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Cancer, January 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12885-016-2083-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ryan A. Denu, Lauren M. Zasadil, Craig Kanugh, Jennifer Laffin, Beth A. Weaver, Mark E. Burkard |
| Abstract |
Centrosome amplification (CA) has been reported in nearly all types of human cancer and is associated with deleterious clinical factors such as higher grade and stage. However, previous reports have not shown how CA affects cellular differentiation and clinical outcomes in breast cancer. We analyzed centrosomes by immunofluorescence and compared to ploidy and chromosomal instability (CIN) as assessed by 6-chromosome FISH in a cohort of 362 breast cancers with median clinical follow-up of 8.4 years. Centrosomes were recognized by immunofluorescence using antibodies for pericentriolar material (PCM; pericentrin) and centrioles (polyglutamylated tubulin). CA was experimentally induced in cell culture by overexpression of polo-like kinase 4 (PLK4). CA is associated with reduced all-cause and breast cancer-specific overall survival and recurrence-free survival. CA correlates strongly with high-risk subtypes (e.g. triple negative) and higher stage and grade, and the prognostic nature of CA can be explained largely by these factors. A strong correlation between CA and high tumor ploidy demonstrates that chromosome and centrosome doubling often occur in concert. CA is proposed to be a method of inducing CIN via aberrant mitotic cell divisions; consonant with this, we observed a strong correlation between CA and CIN in breast cancers. However, some CA tumors had low levels of CIN, indicating that protective mechanisms are at play, such as centrosome clustering during mitosis. Intriguingly, some high-risk tumors have more acentriolar centrosomes, suggesting PCM fragmentation as another mechanism of CA. In vitro induction of CA in two non-transformed human cell lines (MCF10A and RPE) demonstrated that CA induces a de-differentiated cellular state and features of high-grade malignancy, supporting the idea that CA intrinsically causes high-grade tumors. CA is associated with deleterious clinical factors and outcomes in breast cancer. Cell doubling events are the most prevalent causes of CA in cancer, although PCM fragmentation may be a secondary cause. CA promotes high-risk breast cancer in part by inducing high-grade features. These findings highlight the importance of centrosome aberrations in the biology of human breast cancer. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 94 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 93 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 22 | 23% |
| Student > Master | 12 | 13% |
| Researcher | 10 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 4% |
| Other | 9 | 10% |
| Unknown | 28 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 32 | 34% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 20 | 21% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 7% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 3 | 3% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 3 | 3% |
| Unknown | 28 | 30% |
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 03 February 2016.
All research outputs
#18,379,687
of 23,613,071 outputs
Outputs from BMC Cancer
#5,125
of 8,487 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#274,077
of 399,473 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Cancer
#113
of 214 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,613,071 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,487 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.4. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% 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 399,473 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 214 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.