ArticleHistopathology2010
Histological grading of breast cancer on needle core biopsy: the role of immunohistochemical assessment of proliferation.
Article in Histopathology, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 48 citations in OpenAlex.
- Multi-Class Classification of Breast Cancer Subtypes Using ResNet Architectures on Histopathological Images.Journal of imaging · 2025Article
- Photon Absorption Remote Sensing Imaging of Breast Needle Core Biopsies Is Diagnostically Equivalent to Gold Standard H&E Histologic Assessment.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2023Article
- Long Non-Coding RNAs as Potential Diagnostic and Prognostic Biomarkers in Breast Cancer: Progress and Prospects.Frontiers in oncology · 2021Review
- Assessment of tumour proliferation by use of the mitotic activity index, and Ki67 and phosphohistone H3 expression, in early-stage luminal breast cancer.Histopathology · 2020Observational
- [Ki67: biological intertumor variance versus variance of assay].Der Pathologe · 2018Review
- Article
- Expression analysis of AFAP1-AS1 and AFAP1 in breast cancer.Cancer biomarkers : section A of Disease markers · 2018Article
- [Histological grading of breast cancer].Der Pathologe · 2016Review
- [Determination of proliferation in breast cancer by immunohistochemical detection of Ki-67].Der Pathologe · 2014Article
- Does shear wave ultrasound independently predict axillary lymph node metastasis in women with invasive breast cancer?Breast cancer research and treatment · 2014Article
- Article
- Can ki-67 play a role in prediction of breast cancer patients' response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy?BioMed research international · 2014Article
- [Breast cancer: current recommendations for pathologists on the basis of the S3 guidelines].Der Pathologe · 2013Article
- [Translational research and diagnostics for breast cancer].Der Pathologe · 2012Review
- In vivo classification of breast masses using features derived from axial-strain and axial-shear images.Ultrasonic imaging · 2012Article
- Prognostic value of proliferation assay in the luminal, HER2-positive, and triple-negative biologic classes of breast cancer.Breast cancer research : BCR · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsHistological grade assessed on needle core biopsy (NCB) moderately concurs with the grade in the surgical excision specimen (SES) (kappa-values between 0.35 and 0.65). A major cause of the discrepancy is underestimation of mitoses in the NCB specimen. The aim was to determine the best method of assessing proliferation on NCB. METHODS AND
resultsProliferative activity of 101 invasive carcinomas of the breast on NCB and SES was assessed using mitotic counts on routine haematoxylin and eosin (H&E) sections and immunohistochemical markers Mib-1 and phosphorylated histone H3 (PPH3). H&E mitotic count in SES was considered as the gold standard. H&E mitotic count was found to be underestimated on NCB when compared with that in SES (P < 0.001), but no significant difference was detected between NCB and SES regarding Mib-1 (P = 0.13) or PPH3 (P = 0.073). Using receiver-operating characteristic curve, Mib-1 on NCB was found to agree with the gold standard significantly better than routine H&E on NCB.
conclusionsImmunohistochemical markers in NCB showed better concordance with H&E mitotic count in SES (gold standard) than routine H&E mitotic count in NCB. Further refinement of cut-offs and scoring methods is needed.
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.