Strong Time Dependence of the 76-Gene Prognostic Signature for Node-Negative Breast Cancer Patients in the TRANSBIG Multicenter Independent Validation Series

By C. Desmedt, F. Piette, S. Loi, Yixin Wang, F. Lallemand, Benjamin Haibe-Kains, G. Viale, Mauro Delorenzi, Yi Zhang, M. S. D'assignies and 10 more. Clinical Cancer Research, 2007

1,014 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

An online survival analysis tool to rapidly assess the effect of 22,277 genes on breast cancer prognosis using microarray data of 1,809 patients (2010, neutral): “8 198 [28] GSE6532 GPL96 70 (86%) 22 (27%) 19 (23%) 6.”
The humoral immune system has a key prognostic impact in node-negative breast cancer. (2008, methodology): “Metastasis within 5 y Yes 28 (14) 93 (33) 56 (18)”
Nearest Template Prediction: A Single-Sample-Based Flexible Class Prediction with Confidence Assessment (2010, neutral): “Test set 1 (‘‘TransBig’’) 198 HG-U133A* GSE7390 [18]”
PrognoScan: a new database for meta-analysis of the prognostic value of genes (2009, background): “As of February 2009, the collection included more than 40 datasets of various cancer types spanning a wide range of cancers including bladder, blood, breast, brain, esophagus, head and neck, kidney, lung, and ovarian (Table 1) [ 10-35 ], far more comprehensive than both ITTACA, which focuses on blad”
GOBO: Gene Expression-Based Outcome for Breast Cancer Online (2011, neutral): “6 30/83/83 4667 2268 [50]”
Effect of separate sampling on classification accuracy (2014, neutral): “As the authors mentioned, the end points considered in this study were time from diagnosis to distant metastases (TDM), which was the end point used to identify the gene signature, and overall survival, defined as time from diagnosis to death from any cause [6].”