Evidence map›Paper›PMID 10897329›Full record

ArticleMolecular pathology : MP2000

Genetic relation of lobular carcinoma in situ, ductal carcinoma in situ, and associated invasive carcinoma of the breast.

H Buerger, R Simon, K L Schäfer, R Diallo, R Littmann, C Poremba, P J van Diest, B Dockhorn-Dworniczak, W Böcker

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Molecular pathology : MP, 2000. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed
4.2field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

31 citing papers in PubMed, 121 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Lobular Carcinoma In Situ.Surgical pathology clinics · 2018
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. The changing role of pathology in breast cancer diagnosis and treatment.Pathobiology : journal of immunopathology, molecular and cellular biology · 2011
    Review
  13. NUCKS overexpression in breast cancer.Cancer cell international · 2009
    Article
  14. Breast cancer subtypes and response to docetaxel in node-positive breast cancer: use of an immunohistochemical definition in the BCIRG 001 trial.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2009
    Article
  15. Breast cancer precursors: lessons learned from molecular genetics.Journal of molecular medicine (Berlin, Germany) · 2009
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Non-operative breast pathology: lobular neoplasia.Journal of clinical pathology · 2007
    Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

H BuergerGerhard-Domagk-Institute of Pathology, University of Münster, Germany.
R Simon
K L Schäfer
R Diallo
R Littmann
C Poremba
P J van Diest
B Dockhorn-Dworniczak
W Böcker
University of Münster · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsThe mutual relation of lobular carcinoma in situ (LCIS) and ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast, as accepted precursor lesions of invasive breast cancer, is controversial. Because they display genetic heterogeneity, it is not clear how genetically advanced these entities are and what causes the transition to an invasive carcinoma.

methodsSix cases of LCIS, four of them with associated lobular invasive carcinoma, four cases of intermediately differentiated DCIS with an associated invasive lobular carcinoma, and nine cases of intermediately and poorly differentiated DCIS with associated ductal invasive carcinoma were investigated by means of comparative genomic hybridisation (CGH) after microdissection and immunohistochemical staining of E-cadherin.

resultsLCIS was characterised by a low average rate of copy number changes, no evidence of amplifications, and a high rate of gains and losses of chromosomal material at 1q and 16q, respectively. A high degree of genetic homology with well differentiated DCIS was obvious, as reported previously. The cases of intermediately differentiated DCIS with associated lobular invasive components and lobular differentiation revealed striking homologies, and a significant difference of E-cadherin expression. The comparison of preinvasive and invasive breast lesions, irrespective of differentiation within the same patient, revealed no specific alteration that might be associated with invasion. Genetic alterations seen in invasive carcinoma were not necessarily seen in the adjacent precursor lesions.

conclusionsThese results provide strong evidence that invasive breast cancer is a disease with multiple cytogenetic subclones already present in preinvasive lesions. Moreover, specific CGH alterations associated with invasion were not observed. Furthermore, the close genetic association between well differentiated and a subgroup of intermediately differentiated DCIS and LCIS led to the hypothesis that LCIS and a subgroup of DCIS are different phenotypic forms of a common genotype.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsCarcinoma, Ductal, BreastCarcinoma in SituCarcinoma, LobularCell DifferentiationChromosome AberrationsDisease ProgressionFemaleHumansNeoplasm Invasiveness

Identifiers

PMID10897329
PMCPMC1186916
OpenAlexW2110321817

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.