Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21677473›Full record

ReviewPathobiology : journal of immunopathology, molecular and cellular biology2011

The changing role of pathology in breast cancer diagnosis and treatment.

Anthony S-Y Leong, Zhengping Zhuang

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Pathobiology : journal of immunopathology, molecular and cellular biology, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 46 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
46citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

2 authors.

Anthony S-Y LeongHunter Area Pathology Service, Anatomical Pathology, University of Newcastle, Australia. aleong@mail.newcastle.edu.au
Zhengping Zhuang

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Pathological examination has been the gold standard for diagnosis in cancer and its role has also included the elucidation of etiology, pathogenesis, clinicopathological correlation, and prognostication. The advent of newer technologies and the realization that breast cancer is heterogeneous has shifted the focus to prognostication, with increased attention being paid to the identification of morphological features and immunohistochemical markers of prognostic relevance. However, despite the massive efforts invested in the identification of immunohistochemical biomarkers in breast cancer the majority have not proven to be of value in multivariate analyses and only estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, and Her2/neu expression have remained essential components of pathological examination. These 3 markers were initially employed for prognostication but their role in treatment also rendered them of predictive value. Newer molecular methods, especially high-throughput technologies, have shown that even morphologically similar subtypes of breast cancer can show molecular heterogeneity; moreover, infiltrating ductal carcinoma can be separated into at least 4 molecular subtypes designated luminal (ER+, PR+, and Her2/neu-), Her2 overexpressing (ER-, PR-, and Her2/neu+), basal-like (ER-, PR-, Her2/neu-, and CK5/6+, EGFR+), and normal breast-like (ER-, PR-, and Her2/neu-), each with different clinical outcomes. The importance of proliferative gene expression in these subtypes has been demonstrated and surrogate immunohistochemical markers include ER, PR, Her2/neu, and Ki67 for the more expensive molecular tests. Molecular technologies, importantly, have not only provided further insights into the heterogeneity of breast cancer but have also opened new avenues for treatment through the identification of signaling molecules important in the proliferation and survival of the neoplastic cells. The treatment of cancer thus shifts from the conventional approach of 'one size fits all' to one of personalized treatment tailored to the specific characteristics of the tumor. Pathologists continue to play their traditional role in diagnosis but, as purveyors of the excised tissue, pathologists now have the additional role of identifying biomarkers responsive to therapeutic manipulation, thus playing an inextricable role as diagnostic oncologists in the management of breast cancer.

Indexed as

Biomarkers, TumorBreast NeoplasmsCarcinoma, DuctalComparative Genomic HybridizationDrug DiscoveryFemaleGene Expression ProfilingHumansImmunohistochemistryNeoplastic Stem CellsPrognosisProteomicsTissue Array AnalysisBiomarkers, Tumor

Identifiers

PMID21677473
PMCPMC3128144

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.