Evidence map›Paper›PMID 15756255›Full record

ArticleBritish journal of cancer2005

Primary tumour-vessel tumour-nodal tumour classification for patients with invasive ductal carcinoma of the breast.

T Hasebe, S Sasaki, S Imoto, N Wada, G Ishii, A Ochiai

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in British journal of cancer, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. 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

6 authors.

T HasebeDivision of Pathology, The National Cancer Center Research Institute East, Kashiwanoha 6-5-1, Kashiwa, Chiba 277-8577, Japan.
S Sasaki
S Imoto
N Wada
G Ishii
A Ochiai

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There are many studies that show biological differences between invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC) with and without nodal metastasis, but no prognostic classification taking into consideration any biological differences between them is currently available. We previously investigated the histological characteristics that play an important role in tumour progression of IDCs according to their nodal status, and a new prognostic histological classification, the primary tumour-vessel tumour-nodal tumour (PVN) classification, was devised based on the histological characteristics of IDCs with and without nodal metastasis. Multivariate analyses using the Cox proportional hazard regression models were used to compare the ability of the PVN classification to predict tumour recurrence and death in 393 IDC patients based on the following histological classifications: (1) the pTNM classification, (2) the Nottingham Prognostic Index, (3) the modified Nottingham Prognostic Index, and (4) the histologic grade. In IDCs without nodal metastasis, only the PVN classification significantly increased the hazard rates (HRs) of tumour recurrence and death (P<0.05), independent of the hormone receptor status. Similarly, in IDCs with nodal metastases, only the PVN classification significantly increased the HRs of tumour recurrence and death (P<0.05), independent of the hormone receptor status. We conclude that the PVN prognostic histological classification is the best classification available for IDC of the breast.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsCarcinoma, Ductal, BreastDisease-Free SurvivalFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansLymphatic MetastasisNeoplasm InvasivenessNeoplasm StagingNeovascularization, PathologicRecurrenceRetrospective StudiesSurvival AnalysisTime Factors

Identifiers

PMID15756255
PMCPMC2361891

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.