Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20978320›Full record

ArticleAnalytical cellular pathology (Amsterdam)2010

Molecular differences between ductal carcinoma in situ and adjacent invasive breast carcinoma: a multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification study.

Cathy B Moelans, Roel A de Weger, Hanneke N Monsuur, Anoek H J Maes, Paul J van Diest

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Analytical cellular pathology (Amsterdam), 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 41% of its field
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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Whole-Exome Sequencing Analysis of the Progression from Non-Low-Grade Ductal CarcinomaClinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research · 2020
    Observational
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Intratumoral Heterogeneity in Ductal Carcinoma In Situ: Chaos and Consequence.Journal of mammary gland biology and neoplasia · 2018
    Review
  6. Observational
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Clinical implications of cancer self-seeding.Nature reviews. Clinical oncology · 2011
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Cathy B MoelansDepartment of Pathology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands. cmoelans@umcutrecht.nl
Roel A de Weger
Hanneke N Monsuur
Anoek H J Maes
Paul J van Diest
University Medical Center Utrecht · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) accounts for approximately 20% of mammographically detected breast cancers. Although DCIS is generally highly curable, some women with DCIS will develop life-threatening invasive breast cancer, but the determinants of progression to infiltrating ductal cancer (IDC) are largely unknown. In the current study, we used multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification (MLPA), a multiplex PCR-based test, to compare copy numbers of 21 breast cancer related genes between laser-microdissected DCIS and adjacent IDC lesions in 39 patients. Genes included in this study were ESR1, EGFR, FGFR1, ADAM9, IKBKB, PRDM14, MTDH, MYC, CCND1, EMSY, CDH1, TRAF4, CPD, MED1, HER2, CDC6, TOP2A, MAPT, BIRC5, CCNE1 and AURKA.There were no significant differences in copy number for the 21 genes between DCIS and adjacent IDC. Low/intermediate-grade DCIS showed on average 6 gains/amplifications versus 8 in high-grade DCIS (p=0.158). Furthermore, alterations of AURKA and CCNE1 were exclusively found in high-grade DCIS, and HER2, PRDM14 and EMSY amplification was more frequent in high-grade DCIS than in low/intermediate-grade DCIS. In contrast, the average number of alterations in low/intermediate and high-grade IDC was similar, and although EGFR alterations were exclusively found in high-grade IDC compared to low/intermediate-grade IDC, there were generally fewer differences between low/intermediate-grade and high-grade IDC than between low/intermediate-grade and high-grade DCIS.In conclusion, there were no significant differences in copy number for 21 breast cancer related genes between DCIS and adjacent IDC, indicating that DCIS is genetically as advanced as its invasive counterpart. However, high-grade DCIS showed more copy number changes than low/intermediate-grade DCIS with specifically involved genes, supporting a model in which different histological grades of DCIS are associated with distinct genomic changes that progress to IDC in different routes. These high-grade DCIS specific genes may be potential targets for treatment and/or predict progression.

Indexed as

Nucleic Acid Amplification TechniquesBreast NeoplasmsCarcinoma, DuctalFemaleHumansMicrodissection

Identifiers

PMID20978320
PMCPMC4605452
OpenAlexW4393344605

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.