↓ Skip to main content

An imprinted non-coding genomic cluster at 14q32 defines clinically relevant molecular subtypes in osteosarcoma across multiple independent datasets

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Hematology & Oncology, May 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (88th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (91st percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
15 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
40 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
58 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
An imprinted non-coding genomic cluster at 14q32 defines clinically relevant molecular subtypes in osteosarcoma across multiple independent datasets
Published in
Journal of Hematology & Oncology, May 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13045-017-0465-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Katherine E. Hill, Andrew D. Kelly, Marieke L. Kuijjer, William Barry, Ahmed Rattani, Cassandra C. Garbutt, Haydn Kissick, Katherine Janeway, Antonio Perez-Atayde, Jeffrey Goldsmith, Mark C. Gebhardt, Mohamed S. Arredouani, Greg Cote, Francis Hornicek, Edwin Choy, Zhenfeng Duan, John Quackenbush, Benjamin Haibe-Kains, Dimitrios Spentzos

Abstract

A microRNA (miRNA) collection on the imprinted 14q32 MEG3 region has been associated with outcome in osteosarcoma. We assessed the clinical utility of this miRNA set and their association with methylation status. We integrated coding and non-coding RNA data from three independent annotated clinical osteosarcoma cohorts (n = 65, n = 27, and n = 25) and miRNA and methylation data from one in vitro (19 cell lines) and one clinical (NCI Therapeutically Applicable Research to Generate Effective Treatments (TARGET) osteosarcoma dataset, n = 80) dataset. We used time-dependent receiver operating characteristic (tdROC) analysis to evaluate the clinical value of candidate miRNA profiles and machine learning approaches to compare the coding and non-coding transcriptional programs of high- and low-risk osteosarcoma tumors and high- versus low-aggressiveness cell lines. In the cell line and TARGET datasets, we also studied the methylation patterns of the MEG3 imprinting control region on 14q32 and their association with miRNA expression and tumor aggressiveness. In the tdROC analysis, miRNA sets on 14q32 showed strong discriminatory power for recurrence and survival in the three clinical datasets. High- or low-risk tumor classification was robust to using different microRNA sets or classification methods. Machine learning approaches showed that genome-wide miRNA profiles and miRNA regulatory networks were quite different between the two outcome groups and mRNA profiles categorized the samples in a manner concordant with the miRNAs, suggesting potential molecular subtypes. Further, miRNA expression patterns were reproducible in comparing high-aggressiveness versus low-aggressiveness cell lines. Methylation patterns in the MEG3 differentially methylated region (DMR) also distinguished high-aggressiveness from low-aggressiveness cell lines and were associated with expression of several 14q32 miRNAs in both the cell lines and the large TARGET clinical dataset. Within the limits of available CpG array coverage, we observed a potential methylation-sensitive regulation of the non-coding RNA cluster by CTCF, a known enhancer-blocking factor. Loss of imprinting/methylation changes in the 14q32 non-coding region defines reproducible previously unrecognized osteosarcoma subtypes with distinct transcriptional programs and biologic and clinical behavior. Future studies will define the precise relationship between 14q32 imprinting, non-coding RNA expression, genomic enhancer binding, and tumor aggressiveness, with possible therapeutic implications for both early- and advanced-stage patients.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 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 58 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 58 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 16%
Student > Master 8 14%
Student > Bachelor 4 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 7%
Researcher 4 7%
Other 10 17%
Unknown 19 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 12 21%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 16%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 7%
Computer Science 4 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 2%
Other 5 9%
Unknown 23 40%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 19. 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 15 November 2020.
All research outputs
#2,010,601
of 25,736,439 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Hematology & Oncology
#159
of 1,302 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#37,099
of 325,666 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Hematology & Oncology
#4
of 45 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 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,302 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% 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 325,666 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 45 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 91% of its contemporaries.