↓ Skip to main content

Comparison of 6q25 Breast Cancer Hits from Asian and European Genome Wide Association Studies in the Breast Cancer Association Consortium (BCAC)

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, August 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
51 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
64 Mendeley
citeulike
3 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
Comparison of 6q25 Breast Cancer Hits from Asian and European Genome Wide Association Studies in the Breast Cancer Association Consortium (BCAC)
Published in
PLOS ONE, August 2012
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0042380
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rebecca Hein, Melanie Maranian, John L. Hopper, Miroslaw K. Kapuscinski, Melissa C. Southey, Daniel J. Park, Marjanka K. Schmidt, Annegien Broeks, Frans B. L. Hogervorst, H. Bas Bueno-de-Mesquit, Kenneth R. Muir, Artitaya Lophatananon, Suthee Rattanamongkongul, Puttisak Puttawibul, Peter A. Fasching, Alexander Hein, Arif B. Ekici, Matthias W. Beckmann, Olivia Fletcher, Nichola Johnson, Isabel dos Santos Silva, Julian Peto, Elinor Sawyer, Ian Tomlinson, Michael Kerin, Nicola Miller, Frederick Marmee, Andreas Schneeweiss, Christof Sohn, Barbara Burwinkel, Pascal Guénel, Emilie Cordina-Duverger, Florence Menegaux, Thérèse Truong, Stig E. Bojesen, Børge G. Nordestgaard, Henrik Flyger, Roger L. Milne, Jose Ignacio Arias Perez, M. Pilar Zamora, Javier Benítez, Hoda Anton-Culver, Argyrios Ziogas, Leslie Bernstein, Christina A. Clarke, Hermann Brenner, Heiko Müller, Volker Arndt, Christa Stegmaier, Nazneen Rahman, Sheila Seal, Clare Turnbull, Anthony Renwick, Alfons Meindl, Sarah Schott, Claus R. Bartram, Rita K. Schmutzler, Hiltrud Brauch, Ute Hamann, Yon-Dschun Ko, Shan Wang-Gohrke, Thilo Dörk, Peter Schürmann, Johann H. Karstens, Peter Hillemanns, Heli Nevanlinna, Tuomas Heikkinen, Kristiina Aittomäki, Carl Blomqvist, Natalia V. Bogdanova, Iosif V. Zalutsky, Natalia N. Antonenkova, Marina Bermisheva, Darya Prokovieva, Albina Farahtdinova, Elza Khusnutdinova, Annika Lindblom, Sara Margolin, Arto Mannermaa, Vesa Kataja, Veli-Matti Kosma, Jaana Hartikainen, Xiaoqing Chen, Jonathan Beesley, kConFab Investigators, Diether Lambrechts, Hui Zhao, Patrick Neven, Hans Wildiers, Stefan Nickels, Dieter Flesch-Janys, Paolo Radice, Paolo Peterlongo, Siranoush Manoukian, Monica Barile, Fergus J. Couch, Janet E. Olson, Xianshu Wang, Zachary Fredericksen, Graham G. Giles, Laura Baglietto, Catriona A. McLean, Gianluca Severi, Kenneth Offit, Mark Robson, Mia M. Gaudet, Joseph Vijai, Grethe Grenaker Alnæs, Vessela Kristensen, Anne-Lise Børresen-Dale, Esther M. John, Alexander Miron, Robert Winqvist, Katri Pylkäs, Arja Jukkola-Vuorinen, Mervi Grip, Irene L. Andrulis, Julia A. Knight, Gord Glendon, Anna Marie Mulligan, Jonine D. Figueroa, Montserrat García-Closas, Jolanta Lissowska, Mark E. Sherman, Maartje Hooning, John W. M. Martens, Caroline Seynaeve, Margriet Collée, Per Hall, Keith Humpreys, Kamila Czene, Jianjun Liu, Angela Cox, Ian W. Brock, Simon S. Cross, Malcolm W. R. Reed, Shahana Ahmed, Maya Ghoussaini, Paul DP. Pharoah, Daehee Kang, Keun-Young Yoo, Dong-Young Noh, Anna Jakubowska, Katarzyna Jaworska, Katarzyna Durda, Elżbieta Złowocka, Suleeporn Sangrajrang, Valerie Gaborieau, Paul Brennan, James McKay, Chen-Yang Shen, Jyh-Cherng Yu, Huan-Ming Hsu, Ming-Feng Hou, Nick Orr, Minouk Schoemaker, Alan Ashworth, Anthony Swerdlow, Amy Trentham-Dietz, Polly A. Newcomb, Linda Titus, Kathleen M. Egan, Georgia Chenevix-Trench, Antonis C. Antoniou, Manjeet K. Humphreys, Jonathan Morrison, Jenny Chang-Claude, Douglas F. Easton, Alison M. Dunning

Abstract

The 6q25.1 locus was first identified via a genome-wide association study (GWAS) in Chinese women and marked by single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) rs2046210, approximately 180 Kb upstream of ESR1. There have been conflicting reports about the association of this locus with breast cancer in Europeans, and a GWAS in Europeans identified a different SNP, tagged here by rs12662670. We examined the associations of both SNPs in up to 61,689 cases and 58,822 controls from forty-four studies collaborating in the Breast Cancer Association Consortium, of which four studies were of Asian and 39 of European descent. Logistic regression was used to estimate odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Case-only analyses were used to compare SNP effects in Estrogen Receptor positive (ER+) versus negative (ER-) tumours. Models including both SNPs were fitted to investigate whether the SNP effects were independent. Both SNPs are significantly associated with breast cancer risk in both ethnic groups. Per-allele ORs are higher in Asian than in European studies [rs2046210: OR (A/G) = 1.36 (95% CI 1.26-1.48), p = 7.6 × 10(-14) in Asians and 1.09 (95% CI 1.07-1.11), p = 6.8 × 10(-18) in Europeans. rs12662670: OR (G/T) = 1.29 (95% CI 1.19-1.41), p = 1.2 × 10(-9) in Asians and 1.12 (95% CI 1.08-1.17), p = 3.8 × 10(-9) in Europeans]. SNP rs2046210 is associated with a significantly greater risk of ER- than ER+ tumours in Europeans [OR (ER-) = 1.20 (95% CI 1.15-1.25), p = 1.8 × 10(-17) versus OR (ER+) = 1.07 (95% CI 1.04-1.1), p = 1.3 × 10(-7), p(heterogeneity) = 5.1 × 10(-6)]. In these Asian studies, by contrast, there is no clear evidence of a differential association by tumour receptor status. Each SNP is associated with risk after adjustment for the other SNP. These results suggest the presence of two variants at 6q25.1 each independently associated with breast cancer risk in Asians and in Europeans. Of these two, the one tagged by rs2046210 is associated with a greater risk of ER- tumours.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 64 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Uruguay 1 2%
China 1 2%
Belgium 1 2%
Unknown 60 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 14 22%
Professor 12 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 11%
Student > Bachelor 5 8%
Professor > Associate Professor 4 6%
Other 10 16%
Unknown 12 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 22 34%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 12 19%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 9 14%
Psychology 1 2%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 2%
Other 5 8%
Unknown 14 22%

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 20 August 2012.
All research outputs
#7,556,228
of 12,091,105 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#80,088
of 133,026 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#67,475
of 115,884 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#2,177
of 3,527 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,091,105 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 133,026 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.6. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% 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 115,884 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3,527 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.