ReviewJournal of clinical pathology2006
The impact of expression profiling on prognostic and predictive testing in breast cancer.
Review in Journal of clinical pathology, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
34 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- DNA aneuploidy and breast cancer: a meta-analysis of 141,163 cases.Oncotarget · 2016Pooled it
- Evaluation of public cancer datasets and signatures identifies TP53 mutant signatures with robust prognostic and predictive value.BMC cancer · 2015Pooled it
- A data similarity-based strategy for meta-analysis of transcriptional profiles in cancer.PloS one · 2013Pooled it
- Bevacizumab for salvage treatment of metastatic breast cancer: a systemic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Investigational new drugs · 2011Pooled it
- Can clinically relevant prognostic subsets of breast cancer patients with four or more involved axillary lymph nodes be identified through immunohistochemical biomarkers? A tissue microarray feasibility study.Breast cancer research : BCR · 2008Trial
- Deep learning-based prediction of molecular cancer biomarkers from tissue slides: A new tool for precision oncology.Clinical and molecular hepatology · 2022Review
- Triple Negative Breast Cancer Profile, from Gene to microRNA, in Relation to Ethnicity.Cancers · 2019Review
- Molecular genetics complexity impeding research progress in breast and ovarian cancers.Molecular and clinical oncology · 2017Article
- Prognostic relevance of DNA flow cytometry in breast cancer revisited: The 25-year experience of the Portuguese Institute of Oncology of Lisbon.Oncology letters · 2017Article
- Identification of novel susceptibility markers for the risk of overall breast cancer as well as subtypes defined by hormone receptor status in the Chinese population.Journal of human genetics · 2016Article
- Breast cancer classification and prognostication through diverse systems along with recent emerging findings in this respect; the dawn of new perspectives in the clinical applications.Tumour biology : the journal of the International Society for Oncodevelopmental Biology and Medicine · 2016Review
- Identification of novel biomarkers associated with poor patient outcomes in invasive breast carcinoma.Tumour biology : the journal of the International Society for Oncodevelopmental Biology and Medicine · 2016Article
- Inflammatory Breast Cancer: A Distinct Clinicopathological Entity Transcending Histological Distinction.PloS one · 2016Article
- Estrogen-Related Receptors in Breast Cancer and Prostate Cancer.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2015Review
- The Sweden Cancerome Analysis Network - Breast (SCAN-B) Initiative: a large-scale multicenter infrastructure towards implementation of breast cancer genomic analyses in the clinical routine.Genome medicine · 2015Article
- Apoptosis - associated genes and their role in predicting responses to neoadjuvant breast cancer treatment.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2012Article
- Glyceollins as novel targeted therapeutic for the treatment of triple-negative breast cancer.Oncology letters · 2012Article
- Phosphorylated mTOR expression correlates with poor outcome in early-stage triple negative breast carcinomas.International journal of clinical and experimental pathology · 2012Article
- The determination of changes in the expression of genes for selected specific transcriptional factors in in vitro ductal breast cancer cells under the influence of paclitaxel.Cellular & molecular biology letters · 2011Article
- Triple-negative breast cancers: an updated review on treatment options.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2011Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Expression profiling has been extensively applied to the study of breast cancer and undoubtedly is changing the way breast cancer is perceived. Over the past few years, several groups have described prognostic "signatures" (gene lists) that are purported to be more accurate prognostic factors than well established clinical and pathological features. In addition, cDNA and oligonucleotide microarrays have also been used to devise predictive "signatures" in the setting of neoadjuvant chemotherapy setting. However, it seems that the enthusiasm with this new technology has led most of us to turn a blind eye to some serious methodological problems which are evident in landmark papers on breast cancer expression profiling. These issues include small and biased cohorts of patients, inappropriate statistical analysis and lack of thorough validation of the technology. In this review, we critically revisit the most relevant cDNA microarray studies on breast cancer prognosis and prediction published to date. Although the results are promising, further optimisation and standardisation of the technique and properly designed clinical trials are required before microarrays can reliably be used as tools for clinical decision making.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.