Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21041379›Full record

ArticleThe oncologist2010

Estrogen and HER-2 receptor discordance between primary breast cancer and metastasis.

Lajos Pusztai, Giuseppe Viale, Catherine M Kelly, Clifford A Hudis

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in The oncologist, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 80 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
80citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

80 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Diagnostic and Prognostic Role ofJournal of clinical medicine · 2022
    Article
  20. Article

20 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Lajos PusztaiDepartment of Breast Medical Oncology, M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Tx 77230-1439, USA. lpusztai@mdanderson.org
Giuseppe Viale
Catherine M Kelly
Clifford A Hudis

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Discordance in estrogen receptor and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 receptor status between the primary tumor and recurrence is frequently reported in the literature. This is frequently interpreted as evidence for a change in the biology of breast cancer during the course of the disease. This commentary discusses some of the caveats of this interpretation. Discordant receptor results can be caused by any of 3 factors: (a) a genuine switch in the biology of the disease, (b) sampling error in focally receptor-positive cancers, and (c) limited accuracy and reproducibility of receptor assays. The relative contribution of each of these factors to discordant results is unknown. A switch in molecular class between primary and recurrent cancer (or residual cancer after therapy) appears to be a rare event based on the available limited molecular profiling data. Small pockets of strongly focally receptor-positive tumor nests in a larger receptor-negative cancer are also relatively infrequently seen. Discordance resulting from inherent limitations in assay reproducibility is evident from the frequently discordant receptor results even when the same samples are assessed in different laboratories (e.g., central versus local laboratory). A repeat tumor biopsy is clearly justified when it is suspected, on clinical grounds, that the original receptor results may have been false negative or when the diagnosis of metastatic disease is in question. However, routine repeat biopsy for receptor re-evaluation does not necessarily improve diagnostic accuracy and have a potential to harm through a false-negative result. For patients with clinical courses consistent with hormone responsiveness, or with prior positive hormone receptor results, a course of endocrine therapy is reasonable regardless of the most recent hormone receptor assay result.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsNeoplasm MetastasisDiagnosisErb-b2 Receptor Tyrosine KinasesFalse Negative ReactionsFemaleGene ExpressionHumansReceptors, EstrogenReproducibility of ResultsSelection BiasERBB2 protein, humanErb-b2 Receptor Tyrosine KinasesReceptors, Estrogen

Identifiers

PMID21041379
PMCPMC3227913

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.