↓ Skip to main content

Integration of microRNA signatures of distinct mammary epithelial cell types with their gene expression and epigenetic portraits

Overview of attention for article published in Breast Cancer Research, June 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (67th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (51st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
29 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
63 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
Integration of microRNA signatures of distinct mammary epithelial cell types with their gene expression and epigenetic portraits
Published in
Breast Cancer Research, June 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13058-015-0585-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Bhupinder Pal, Yunshun Chen, Andrew Bert, Yifang Hu, Julie M. Sheridan, Tamara Beck, Wei Shi, Keith Satterley, Paul Jamieson, Gregory J. Goodall, Geoffrey J. Lindeman, Gordon K. Smyth, Jane E. Visvader

Abstract

MicroRNAs (miRNAs) have been implicated in governing lineage specification and differentiation in multiple organs, however, little is known about their specific roles in mammopoiesis. We have determined the global miRNA expression profiles of functionally distinct epithelial subpopulations in mouse and human mammary tissue, and compared these to their cognate transcriptomes and epigenomes. Finally, the human miRNA signatures were used to interrogate the different subtypes of breast cancer, with a view to determining miRNA networks deregulated during oncogenesis. RNA from sorted mouse and human mammary cell subpopulations was subjected to miRNA expression analysis using the TaqMan MicroRNA Array. Differentially expressed (DE) miRNAs were correlated with gene expression and histone methylation profiles. Analysis of miRNA signatures of the intrinsic subtypes of breast cancer in the TCGA database versus those of normal human epithelial subpopulations was performed. Unique miRNA signatures characterized each subset (MaSC/basal, luminal progenitor, mature luminal, stromal), with a high degree of conservation across species. Comparison of miRNA and transcriptome profiles for the epithelial subtypes revealed an inverse relationship and pinpointed key developmental genes. Interestingly, expression of the primate-specific miRNA cluster (19q13.4) was found to be restricted to the MaSC/basal subset. Comparative analysis of miRNA signatures with H3 lysine modification maps of the different epithelial subsets revealed a tight correlation between active or repressive marks for the top DE miRNAs, including derepression of miRNAs in Ezh2-deficient cellular subsets. Interrogation of TCGA-identified miRNA profiles with the miRNA signatures of different human subsets revealed specific relationships. The derivation of global miRNA expression profiles for the different mammary subpopulations provides a comprehensive resource for understanding the interplay between miRNA networks and target gene expression. These data have highlighted lineage-specific miRNAs and potential miRNA-mRNA networks, some of which are disrupted in neoplasia. Furthermore, our findings suggest that key developmental miRNAs are regulated by global changes in histone modification, thus linking the mammary epigenome with genome-wide changes in the expression of genes and miRNAs. Comparative miRNA signature analyses between normal breast epithelial cells and breast tumors confirmed an important linkage between luminal progenitor cells and basal-like tumors.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 63 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 2%
Denmark 1 2%
Italy 1 2%
Norway 1 2%
Unknown 59 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 18 29%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 17%
Student > Master 9 14%
Professor > Associate Professor 5 8%
Professor 3 5%
Other 6 10%
Unknown 11 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 21 33%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 18 29%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 13%
Environmental Science 1 2%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 2%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 14 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 31 July 2015.
All research outputs
#7,960,052
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Breast Cancer Research
#902
of 2,052 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#86,821
of 278,171 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Breast Cancer Research
#16
of 33 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,052 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% 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 278,171 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 33 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 51% of its contemporaries.