ArticlePloS one2010
A straightforward but not piecewise relationship between age and lymph node status in Chinese breast cancer patients.
Article in PloS one, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Trial
- Trial
- Low expression of stathmin in tumor predicts high response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy with docetaxel-containing regimens in locally advanced breast cancer.Genetic testing and molecular biomarkers · 2012Trial
- Multi-center study on predicting breast cancer lymph node status from core needle biopsy specimens using multi-modal and multi-instance deep learning.NPJ breast cancer · 2023Article
- Risk of breast cancer and family history of other cancers in first-degree relatives in Chinese women: a case control study.BMC cancer · 2014Article
- Tumor associated macrophage × cancer cell hybrids may acquire cancer stem cell properties in breast cancer.PloS one · 2012Article
- Different annual recurrence pattern between lumpectomy and mastectomy: implication for breast cancer surveillance after breast-conserving surgery.The oncologist · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo investigate the relationship between age and axillary lymph node (LN) involvement in Chinese breast cancer patients, and to replicate a recently identified piecewise relationship between age and LN involvement.
methodsA dataset, consisting of 3,715 patients (with complete information on study variables) with operable breast cancer consecutively surgically treated between 1996 and 2006, was derived from the database of Shanghai Cancer Hospital. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression were employed to analyze the relationship between age and LN. We subsequently performed a similar analysis on another dataset including 1,832 consecutive patients treated between 2007 and 2008 to replicate our findings in the first dataset.
resultsA U-shaped relationship (previously observed in two European populations) between age and LN status failed to be replicated in our dataset of Chinese patients. Instead, we observed a linear rather than piecewise relationship. After multivariate adjustment, the linear relationship was still present. Moreover, the interaction between age and LN involvement was not modified by tumor size. The odds of LN involvement decreased by 1.5% for each year increase in age (OR 0.985, 95% CI 0.979-0.991, P<0.001). Breast cancer subtypes were also associated with LN status. Proportions of basal-like and ERBB2+ subtypes decreased with increasing age. The observations in the first dataset were successfully replicated in a second independent dataset.
conclusionWe confirmed a straightforward but not piecewise relationship between age and LN status in Chinese patients. The different pattern between Chinese and European elderly patients should be considered when making clinical decisions.
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.