| Literature DB >> 25284793 |
Ali Tofigh1, Matthew Suderman1, Eric R Paquet1, Julie Livingstone1, Nicholas Bertos2, Sadiq M Saleh3, Hong Zhao2, Margarita Souleimanova2, Sean Cory1, Robert Lesurf3, Solmaz Shahalizadeh4, Norberto Garcia Lopez5, Yasser Riazalhosseini6, Atilla Omeroglu7, Josie Ursini-Siegel8, Morag Park9, Vanessa Dumeaux10, Michael Hallett11.
Abstract
Breast carcinoma (BC) has been extensively profiled by high-throughput technologies for over a decade, and broadly speaking, these studies can be grouped into those that seek to identify patient subtypes (studies of heterogeneity) or those that seek to identify gene signatures with prognostic or predictive capacity. The sheer number of reported signatures has led to speculation that everything is prognostic in BC. Here, we show that this ubiquity is an apparition caused by a poor understanding of the interrelatedness between subtype and the molecular determinants of prognosis. Our approach constructively shows how to avoid confounding due to a patient's subtype, clinicopathological profile, or treatment profile. The approach identifies patients who are predicted to have good outcome at time of diagnosis by all available clinical and molecular markers but who experience a distant metastasis within 5 years. These inherently difficult patients (~7% of BC) are prioritized for investigations of intratumoral heterogeneity.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2014 PMID: 25284793 DOI: 10.1016/j.celrep.2014.08.073
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Cell Rep Impact factor: 9.423