Corpus 1,272 assessed · 1,173 scored · 643 reproduced ≥75 · 168 flagged ·∅ 74.1/100
← Dataset search

GSE76039

GEO

Genomic and Transcriptomic Hallmarks of Poorly-Differentiated and Anaplastic Thyroid Cancers

Organism
Homo sapiens
Samples
37
Type
Expression profiling by arra...
Submitted
2015-12-15

BACKGROUND. Poorly-differentiated (PDTC) and anaplastic (ATC) thyroid cancers are rare and frequently lethal tumors, which so far have not been subjected to comprehensive genetic characterization. METHODS. We performed next generation sequencing of 341 cancer genes in 117 PDTCs and ATCs, and a transcriptomic analysis of a representative subset of 37 tumors. Results were analyzed in the context of The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) study of papillary thyroid cancers (PTC). RESULTS. ATCs have a grea...

Provenance — who produced it, who reused it

Linked to 22 papers in the literature. Roles are inferred factual signals (who deposited the data vs who reused it), with counts — never a judgement about any author.

Deposited / produced by
Iñigo LandaTihana IbrahimpasicLaura BoucaiRileen SinhaJeffrey A KnaufSnjezana DoganRonak H ShahJulio C Ricarte-FilhoGnana P KrishnamoorthyBin XuNikolaus SchultzMichael F BergerChris SanderBarry S TaylorRonald GhosseinIan GanlyJames A Fagin
Reused by

22 further papers cite this accession but reuse could not be confirmed.

Deep data QC

metadata only · no data-level QC for this type

Standardized, field-standard QC computed by touching the data — every metric states how it was obtained

No quantitative QC rubric exists for this data type yet, so it is deliberately left unscored — this is an honest "not applicable", not a poor rating.

QC cost 6 s compute

measured = computed from the data · extrapolated/reported = derived or from the repository · dq-1.0 · provisional — verify independently

Scientific quality

Based on hands-on reproduction of the papers that use this dataset. A reproducible paper that stands on this data is positive evidence; a flagged one is a prompt to look closer — never a verdict on the dataset itself without the evidence.

1 studies use it 1 flagged