↓ Skip to main content

Multiple oncogenic viruses are present in human breast tissues before development of virus associated breast cancer

Overview of attention for article published in Infectious Agents and Cancer, October 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
29 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
57 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
Multiple oncogenic viruses are present in human breast tissues before development of virus associated breast cancer
Published in
Infectious Agents and Cancer, October 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13027-017-0165-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

James S. Lawson, Wendy K. Glenn

Abstract

Multiple oncogenic viruses including, mouse mammary tumor virus, bovine leukemia virus, human papilloma virus, and Epstein Barr virus, have been identified as separate infectious pathogens in human breast cancer. Here we demonstrate that these four viruses may be present in normal and benign breast tissues 1 to 11 years before the development of same virus breast cancer in the same patients. We combined the data we developed during investigations of the individual four oncogenic viruses and breast cancer. Patients who had benign breast biopsies 1-11 years prior to developing breast cancer were identified by pathology reports from a large Australian pathology service (Douglas Hanly Moir Pathology). Archival formalin fixed specimens from these patients were collected. The same archival specimens were used for (i) investigations of mouse mammary tumour virus (also known as human mammary tumour virus) conducted at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York and at the University of Pisa, Italy, (ii) bovine leukemia virus conducted at the University of California at Berkeley,(iii) human papilloma virus and Epstein Barr virus conducted at the University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia. Seventeen normal breast tissues from cosmetic breast surgery conducted on Australian patients were used as controls. These patients were younger than those with benign and later breast cancer. Standard and in situ polymerase chain reaction (PCR) methods were used to identify the four viruses. The detailed methods are outlined in the separate publications.: mouse mammary tumor virus, human papilloma virus and Epstein Barr virus (Infect Agent Cancer 12:1, 2017, PLoS One 12:e0179367, 2017, Front Oncol 5:277, 2015, PLoS One 7:e48788, 2012). Epstein Barr virus and human papilloma virus were identified in the same breast cancer cells by in situ PCR. Mouse mammary tumour virus was identified in 6 (24%) of 25 benign breast specimens and in 9 (36%) of 25 breast cancer specimens which subsequently developed in the same patients. Bovine leukemia virus was identified in 18 (78%) of 23 benign breast specimens and in 20 (91%) of 22 subsequent breast cancers in the same patients. High risk human papilloma viruses were identified in 13 (72%) of 17 benign breast specimens and in 13 (76%) of 17 subsequent breast cancers in the same patients. Epstein Barr virus was not identified in any benign breast specimens but was identified in 3 (25%) of 12 subsequent breast cancers in the same patients. Mouse mammary tumour virus 3 (18%), bovine leukemia virus 6 (35%), high risk human papilloma virus 3 (18%) and Epstein Barr virus 5 (29%) were identified in 17 normal control breast specimens. These findings add to the evidence that multiple oncogenic viruses have potential roles in human breast cancer. This is an important observation because evidence of prior infection before the development of disease is a key criterion when assessing causation.

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 57 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 57 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 9 16%
Student > Bachelor 8 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 14%
Researcher 5 9%
Lecturer 4 7%
Other 8 14%
Unknown 15 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 12 21%
Medicine and Dentistry 10 18%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 12%
Immunology and Microbiology 4 7%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 2 4%
Other 5 9%
Unknown 17 30%
Attention Score in Context

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 04 June 2020.
All research outputs
#17,921,555
of 23,009,818 outputs
Outputs from Infectious Agents and Cancer
#302
of 522 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#233,171
of 325,905 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Infectious Agents and Cancer
#4
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,009,818 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 522 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.4. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% 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 325,905 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.