Literature DB >> 17130137

Improved breast cancer prognosis through the combination of clinical and genetic markers.

Yijun Sun1, Steve Goodison, Jian Li, Li Liu, William Farmerie.   

Abstract

MOTIVATION: Accurate prognosis of breast cancer can spare a significant number of breast cancer patients from receiving unnecessary adjuvant systemic treatment and its related expensive medical costs. Recent studies have demonstrated the potential value of gene expression signatures in assessing the risk of post-surgical disease recurrence. However, these studies all attempt to develop genetic marker-based prognostic systems to replace the existing clinical criteria, while ignoring the rich information contained in established clinical markers. Given the complexity of breast cancer prognosis, a more practical strategy would be to utilize both clinical and genetic marker information that may be complementary.
METHODS: A computational study is performed on publicly available microarray data, which has spawned a 70-gene prognostic signature. The recently proposed I-RELIEF algorithm is used to identify a hybrid signature through the combination of both genetic and clinical markers. A rigorous experimental protocol is used to estimate the prognostic performance of the hybrid signature and other prognostic approaches. Survival data analyses is performed to compare different prognostic approaches.
RESULTS: The hybrid signature performs significantly better than other methods, including the 70-gene signature, clinical makers alone and the St. Gallen consensus criterion. At the 90% sensitivity level, the hybrid signature achieves 67% specificity, as compared to 47% for the 70-gene signature and 48% for the clinical makers. The odds ratio of the hybrid signature for developing distant metastases within five years between the patients with a good prognosis signature and the patients with a bad prognosis is 21.0 (95% CI:6.5-68.3), far higher than either genetic or clinical markers alone. AVAILABILITY: The breast cancer dataset is available at www.nature.com and Matlab codes are available upon request.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2006        PMID: 17130137      PMCID: PMC3431620          DOI: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btl543

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Bioinformatics        ISSN: 1367-4803            Impact factor:   6.937


  29 in total

1.  Identification of a novel family of cell-surface proteins expressed in human vascular endothelium.

Authors:  Ruey-Bing Yang; Chi Kin Domingos Ng; Scott M Wasserman; Steven D Colman; Suresh Shenoy; Fuad Mehraban; Laszlo G Komuves; James E Tomlinson; James N Topper
Journal:  J Biol Chem       Date:  2002-09-21       Impact factor: 5.157

2.  Cancer biomarkers--an invitation to the table.

Authors:  William S Dalton; Stephen H Friend
Journal:  Science       Date:  2006-05-26       Impact factor: 47.728

3.  Characterization of an antigen that is recognized on a melanoma showing partial HLA loss by CTL expressing an NK inhibitory receptor.

Authors:  H Ikeda; B Lethé; F Lehmann; N van Baren; J F Baurain; C de Smet; H Chambost; M Vitale; A Moretta; T Boon; P G Coulie
Journal:  Immunity       Date:  1997-02       Impact factor: 31.745

4.  Gene expression profiling predicts clinical outcome of breast cancer.

Authors:  Laura J van 't Veer; Hongyue Dai; Marc J van de Vijver; Yudong D He; Augustinus A M Hart; Mao Mao; Hans L Peterse; Karin van der Kooy; Matthew J Marton; Anke T Witteveen; George J Schreiber; Ron M Kerkhoven; Chris Roberts; Peter S Linsley; René Bernards; Stephen H Friend
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2002-01-31       Impact factor: 49.962

5.  Cloning, mapping, and expression analysis of a gene encoding a novel mammalian EGF-related protein (SCUBE1).

Authors:  S Grimmond; R Larder; N Van Hateren; P Siggers; T J Hulsebos; R Arkell; A Greenfield
Journal:  Genomics       Date:  2000-11-15       Impact factor: 5.736

6.  The RhoGAP protein DLC-1 functions as a metastasis suppressor in breast cancer cells.

Authors:  Steve Goodison; Jing Yuan; Derek Sloan; Ryung Kim; Cheng Li; Nicholas C Popescu; Virginia Urquidi
Journal:  Cancer Res       Date:  2005-07-15       Impact factor: 12.701

7.  Obvious peritumoral emboli: an elusive prognostic factor reappraised. Multivariate analysis of 1320 node-negative breast cancers.

Authors:  I de Mascarel; F Bonichon; M Durand; L Mauriac; G MacGrogan; I Soubeyran; V Picot; A Avril; J M Coindre; M Trojani
Journal:  Eur J Cancer       Date:  1998-01       Impact factor: 9.162

8.  Pathological prognostic factors in breast cancer. I. The value of histological grade in breast cancer: experience from a large study with long-term follow-up.

Authors:  C W Elston; I O Ellis
Journal:  Histopathology       Date:  1991-11       Impact factor: 5.087

9.  Pathological prognostic factors in breast cancer. III. Vascular invasion: relationship with recurrence and survival in a large study with long-term follow-up.

Authors:  S E Pinder; I O Ellis; M Galea; S O'Rouke; R W Blamey; C W Elston
Journal:  Histopathology       Date:  1994-01       Impact factor: 5.087

10.  Gene expression signature of estrogen receptor alpha status in breast cancer.

Authors:  Martín C Abba; Yuhui Hu; Hongxia Sun; Jeffrey A Drake; Sally Gaddis; Keith Baggerly; Aysegul Sahin; C Marcelo Aldaz
Journal:  BMC Genomics       Date:  2005-03-11       Impact factor: 3.969

View more
  52 in total

1.  Network-based Prediction of Cancer under Genetic Storm.

Authors:  Ahmet Ay; Dihong Gong; Tamer Kahveci
Journal:  Cancer Inform       Date:  2014-10-15

Review 2.  Assessment of kidney organ quality and prediction of outcome at time of transplantation.

Authors:  Thomas F Mueller; Kim Solez; Valeria Mas
Journal:  Semin Immunopathol       Date:  2011-01-28       Impact factor: 9.623

3.  Cancer progression modeling using static sample data.

Authors:  Yijun Sun; Jin Yao; Norma J Nowak; Steve Goodison
Journal:  Genome Biol       Date:  2014-08-26       Impact factor: 13.583

4.  Pathway-BasedFeature Selection Algorithm for Cancer Microarray Data.

Authors:  Nirmalya Bandyopadhyay; Tamer Kahveci; Steve Goodison; Y Sun; Sanjay Ranka
Journal:  Adv Bioinformatics       Date:  2010-03-03

5.  Derivation of molecular signatures for breast cancer recurrence prediction using a two-way validation approach.

Authors:  Yijun Sun; Virginia Urquidi; Steve Goodison
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2009-03-17       Impact factor: 4.872

6.  Testing the additional predictive value of high-dimensional molecular data.

Authors:  Anne-Laure Boulesteix; Torsten Hothorn
Journal:  BMC Bioinformatics       Date:  2010-02-08       Impact factor: 3.169

7.  Integrative mixture of experts to combine clinical factors and gene markers.

Authors:  Kim-Anh Lê Cao; Emmanuelle Meugnier; Geoffrey J McLachlan
Journal:  Bioinformatics       Date:  2010-03-11       Impact factor: 6.937

8.  Combining clinical and genomic covariates via Cov-TGDR.

Authors:  Shuangge Ma; Jian Huang
Journal:  Cancer Inform       Date:  2007-10-15

9.  Survival prediction from clinico-genomic models--a comparative study.

Authors:  Hege M Bøvelstad; Ståle Nygård; Ornulf Borgan
Journal:  BMC Bioinformatics       Date:  2009-12-13       Impact factor: 3.169

10.  Clinical bioinformatics for complex disorders: a schizophrenia case study.

Authors:  Emanuel Schwarz; F Markus Leweke; Sabine Bahn; Pietro Liò
Journal:  BMC Bioinformatics       Date:  2009-10-15       Impact factor: 3.169

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.