ArticleVirchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology2010
Myoepithelial carcinoma of the breast: a clinicopathological and immunohistochemical study of 15 diagnostically challenging cases.
Article in Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Orbital myoepithelial carcinoma: implications for diagnosis and treatment strategies.BMC cancer · 2025Article
- The most likely but largely ignored triggering factor for breast (or all) cancer invasion.Journal of Cancer · 2023Article
- A case of adenomyoepithelioma with myoepithelial carcinoma of the breast.Clinical case reports · 2019Article
- Context-Dependent Function of Myoepithelial Cells in Breast Morphogenesis and Neoplasia.Current molecular biology reports · 2015Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Myoepithelial carcinoma (MEC) is a rare type of breast cancer composed purely of myoepithelial cells. Most often it presents with a spindle cell morphology that can mimic several benign and malignant lesions and may be misdiagnosed by the pathologist. We report 15 cases of MEC, which were sent to our consultation practice: Five of them were initially diagnosed as benign. The patients, all female, ranged from 45 to 86 years in age (mean 69.5) and-with one exception-presented with a breast mass. The tumor size measured between 1 and 4.8 cm (mean 2.6 cm). Microscopically, the tumors had infiltrative growth pattern most frequently with thin anastomosing cords of tumor cells associated with an intimately admixed reactive spindle cell stroma. The neoplastic myoepithelial cells were emanating from the myoepithelial cell layer of entrapped ductules in every case. The nuclei showed mild to moderate pleomorphism, and the mitotic activity ranged from 0 to 9/10 high power field. Immunohistochemical stains for p63, CD10, CK903, and CK5/6 reacted strongly and diffusely with the tumor cells, and mainly the reactive stroma had weak positivity for calponin, S-100, and smooth muscle actin. Estrogen receptor, progesteron receptor, and Her2 immunostains were negative, but strong epidermal growth factor receptor expression was observed. Follow-up was available for seven patients: All of them were alive at last contact; one patient had local recurrence, and one developed pulmonary metastases. MEC is a potentially aggressive malignant neoplasm sharing many features with metaplastic carcinomas. Morphologically, it is often difficult to distinguish it from benign spindle cell proliferations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
20658149What 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.