Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23127292›Full record

Trial reportBreast cancer research : BCR2012

Prognostic interaction between expression of p53 and estrogen receptor in patients with node-negative breast cancer: results from IBCSG Trials VIII and IX.

Alan S Coates, Ewan K A Millar, Sandra A O'Toole, Timothy J Molloy, Giuseppe Viale, Aron Goldhirsch, Meredith M Regan, Richard D Gelber, Zhuoxin Sun, Monica Castiglione-Gertsch and 3 more

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Breast cancer research : BCR, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 38 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
38citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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

38 citing papers in PubMed, 59 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. TP53 Pathway Function, Estrogen Receptor Status, and Breast Cancer Risk Factors in the Carolina Breast Cancer Study.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2022
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Observational
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

13 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Alan S Coates
Ewan K A Millar
Sandra A O'Toole
Timothy J Molloy
Giuseppe Viale
Aron Goldhirsch
Meredith M Regan
Richard D Gelber
Zhuoxin Sun
Monica Castiglione-Gertsch
Barry Gusterson
Elizabeth A Musgrove
Robert L Sutherland
Garvan Institute of Medical Research · AUInternational Breast Cancer Study Group · CHThe Kinghorn Cancer Centre · AUSt Vincent's Clinic · AU

Funding

IBCSG STATISTICAL CENTER--A BREAST CANCER STUDY RESOURCEU24CA075362 · NCI · DANA-FARBER CANCER INSTITUTE · PI REGAN, MEREDITH M · 1997 to 2015
$7.5M
NCI NIH HHS CA-75362NCI NIH HHS U24 CA075362
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe prognostic significance of p53 protein expression in early breast cancer remains uncertain, with some but not all studies finding an association with poorer outcomes. Estrogen receptor (ER) expression is both a positive prognostic marker and predictive of response to endocrine therapies. The relationship between these biomarkers is unknown.

methodsWe constructed tissue microarrays (TMAs) from available pathological material from 1113 patients participating in two randomized clinical trials comparing endocrine therapy alone versus chemo-endocrine therapy in node-negative breast cancer. Expression of p53 defined as >10% positive nuclei was analyzed together with prior immunohistochemical assays of ER performed at central pathological review of whole tumor sections.

resultsER was present (i.e. >1% positive tumor cell nuclei) in 80.1% (880/1092). p53 expression was significantly more frequent when ER was absent, 125/212 (59%) than when ER was present, 171/880 (19%), p <0.0001. A significant qualitative interaction was observed such that p53 expression was associated with better disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) among patients whose tumors did not express ER, but worse DFS and OS among patients whose tumors expressed ER. The interaction remained significant after allowance for pathologic variables, and treatment. Similar effects were seen when luminal and non-luminal intrinsic subtypes were compared.

conclusionsInterpretation of the prognostic significance of p53 expression requires knowledge of concurrent expression of ER. The reason for the interaction between p53 and ER is unknown but may reflect qualitatively different p53 mutations underlying the p53 expression in tumors with or without ER expression.

trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ACTRN12607000037404 (Trial VIII) and ACTRN12607000029493 (Trial IX).

Indexed as

Antineoplastic Agents, HormonalAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsBiomarkers, TumorBreast NeoplasmsCyclophosphamideDisease-Free SurvivalFemaleFluorouracilGoserelinHumansLymph NodesMethotrexateMiddle AgedReceptors, EstrogenTamoxifenTissue Array AnalysisAntineoplastic Agents, HormonalBiomarkers, TumorCyclophosphamideFluorouracilGoserelinMethotrexateReceptors, EstrogenTamoxifenTumor Suppressor Protein p53

Identifiers

PMID23127292
PMCPMC4053129
OpenAlexW2124964909

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.