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 |
Limited utility of tissue micro-arrays in detecting intra-tumoral heterogeneity in stem cell characteristics and tumor progression markers in breast cancer
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Translational Medicine, May 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12967-018-1495-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Pascale Kündig, Charlotte Giesen, Hartland Jackson, Bernd Bodenmiller, Bärbel Papassotirolopus, Sandra Nicole Freiberger, Catharine Aquino, Lennart Opitz, Zsuzsanna Varga |
| Abstract |
Intra-tumoral heterogeneity has been recently addressed in different types of cancer, including breast cancer. A concept describing the origin of intra-tumoral heterogeneity is the cancer stem-cell hypothesis, proposing the existence of cancer stem cells that can self-renew limitlessly and therefore lead to tumor progression. Clonal evolution in accumulated single cell genomic alterations is a further possible explanation in carcinogenesis. In this study, we addressed the question whether intra-tumoral heterogeneity can be reliably detected in tissue-micro-arrays in breast cancer by comparing expression levels of conventional predictive/prognostic tumor markers, tumor progression markers and stem cell markers between central and peripheral tumor areas. We analyzed immunohistochemical expression and/or gene amplification status of conventional prognostic tumor markers (ER, PR, HER2, CK5/6), tumor progression markers (PTEN, PIK3CA, p53, Ki-67) and stem cell markers (mTOR, SOX2, SOX9, SOX10, SLUG, CD44, CD24, TWIST) in 372 tissue-micro-array samples from 72 breast cancer patients. Expression levels were compared between central and peripheral tumor tissue areas and were correlated to histopathological grading. 15 selected cases additionally underwent RNA sequencing for transcriptome analysis. No significant difference in any of the analyzed between central and peripheral tumor areas was seen with any of the analyzed methods/or results that showed difference. Except mTOR, PIK3CA and SOX9 (nuclear) protein expression, all markers correlated significantly (p < 0.05) with histopathological grading both in central and peripheral areas. Our results suggest that intra-tumoral heterogeneity of stem-cell and tumor-progression markers cannot be reliably addressed in tissue-micro-array samples in breast cancer. However, most markers correlated strongly with histopathological grading confirming prognostic information as expression profiles were independent on the site of the biopsy was taken. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Austria | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 25 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 25 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 4% |
| Librarian | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 2 | 8% |
| Unknown | 12 | 48% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 16% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 8% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 4% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 4% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 3 | 12% |
| Unknown | 13 | 52% |
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 10 May 2018.
All research outputs
#15,508,366
of 23,047,237 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Translational Medicine
#2,266
of 4,037 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#208,792
of 327,709 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Translational Medicine
#30
of 94 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,047,237 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,037 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.6. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% 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 327,709 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 94 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% of its contemporaries.