ArticleDiagnostic pathology2012
Immunohistochemical characterization of neoplastic cells of breast origin.
Article in Diagnostic pathology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Significance of ERβ expression in different molecular subtypes of breast cancer.Diagnostic pathology · 2014Article
- Clinico- pathological profile of patients with breast diseases.Diagnostic pathology · 2013Article
- Long-term analysis to objectify the tumour grading by means of automated microscopic image analysis of the nucleolar organizer regions (AgNORs) in the case of breast carcinoma.Diagnostic pathology · 2013Article
- Luminal B tumors are the most frequent molecular subtype in breast cancer of North African women: an immunohistochemical profile study from Morocco.Diagnostic pathology · 2012Article
- A comprehensive morphological study for basal-like breast carcinomas with comparison to nonbasal-like carcinomas.Diagnostic pathology · 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAfter skin cancer, breast cancer is the most common malignancy in women. Tumors of unknown origin account for 5-15% of malignant neoplasms, with 1.5% being breast cancer. An immunohistochemical panel with conventional and newer markers, such as mammaglobin, was selected for the detection of neoplastic cells of breast origin. The specific objectives are: 1) to determine the sensitivity and specificity of the panel, with a special emphasis on the inclusion of the mammaglobin marker, and 2) to compare immunohistochemistry performed on whole tissue sections and on tissue micro-array.
methodsTwenty-nine metastatic breast tumors were included and assumed as tumors of unknown origin. Other 48 biopsies of diverse tissues were selected and assumed as negative controls. Tissue Micro-Array was performed. Immunohistochemistry for mammaglobin, gross cystic disease fluid protein-15, estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor and cytokeratin 7 was done.
resultsMammaglobin positive staining was observed in 10/29 cases, in 13/29 cases for gross cystic disease fluid protein-15, in 20/29 cases for estrogen receptor, in 9/29 cases for progesterone receptor, and in 25/29 cases for cytokeratin 7. Among the negative controls, mammaglobin was positive in 2/48, and gross cystic disease fluid protein-15 in 4/48.
conclusionsThe inclusion of MAG antibody in the immunohistochemical panel for the detection of tumors of unknown origin contributed to the detection of metastasis of breast cancer. The diagnostic strategy with the highest positive predictive value (88%) included hormone receptors and mammaglobin in serial manner.
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.