ArticleWorld journal of surgical oncology2012
Different distribution of breast ductal carcinoma in situ, ductal carcinoma in situ with microinvasion, and invasion breast cancer.
Article in World journal of surgical oncology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 31 citations in OpenAlex.
- Ultrasound-based radiomic nomogram for predicting the invasive status of breast cancer: a multicenter study.European journal of medical research · 2025Article
- Article
- Clinical Features and Prognoses of Patients With Breast Cancer Who Underwent Surgery.JAMA network open · 2023Article
- Clinicopathological characteristics, treatments, and prognosis of breast ductal carcinoma in situ with microinvasion: A narrative review.Chronic diseases and translational medicine · 2023Review
- Comparison of the ductal carcinoma in situ between White Americans and Chinese Americans.Medicine · 2021Observational
- Article
- Breast Microinvasive Carcinoma With Different Morphologies: Analysis of Clinicopathologic Features of 121 Cases.Breast cancer : basic and clinical research · 2020Article
- Differences in pathologic characteristics between ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), DCIS with microinvasion and DCIS with invasive ductal carcinoma.International journal of clinical and experimental pathology · 2020Article
- Multiple Microinvasion Foci in Ductal CarcinomaFrontiers in oncology · 2020Article
- Imaging features that distinguish pure ductal carcinomaMolecular and clinical oncology · 2019Article
- N-Acetylglucosaminyltransferase III (GnT-III) but not N-Acetylgalactosaminyltransferase-6 and 8 are Differentially Expressed in Invasive and In Situ Ductal Carcinoma of the Breast.Pathology oncology research : POR · 2019Article
- Biologic behavior and long-term outcomes of breast ductal carcinoma in situ with microinvasion.Oncotarget · 2016Article
- Is adjuvant chemotherapy necessary for patients with microinvasive breast cancer after surgery?Cancer biology & medicine · 2016Article
- Impact of the presence and quantity of ductal carcinoma in situ component on the outcome of invasive breast cancer.International journal of clinical and experimental pathology · 2015Article
- Preclinical HER-2 Vaccines: From Rodent to Human HER-2.Frontiers in oncology · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBreast ductal cancer in situ (DCIS) can recur or progress to invasive ductal cancer (IDC), and the interim stage include DCIS with microinvasion (DCIS-Mi). In this article, we attempt to study the study the differences of clinicopathological features, imaging data, and immunohistochemical-based subtypes among DCIS, DCIS-Mi, and IDC.
methodsIn this retrospective study, we attempt to compare the clinicopathological features, immunohistochemical results and imaging data of 866 patients (included 73 DCIS, 72 DCIS-Mi, and 721 IDC).
resultsPatients with DCIS and DCIS-Mi were younger than those with IDC (P = 0.007). DCIS and DCIS-Mi often happened in premenopausal women while IDC was opposite (P <0.001). The incidence of IDC with node-positive was significantly higher than it in DCIS and DCIS-Mi (P <0.001). We also observed that the Her2-positive was more often found in patients with pure DCIS compared to those with DCIS-Mi and DCIS-I (P <0.001). There was a significant difference between the four subgroups (Luminal-A, Luminal-B, ERBB2+, Basal-like) from DCIS, DCIS-Mi, and IDC (P <0.001). Basal-like patients were fewer than other subgroups in DCIS, DCIS-Mi, and IDC. The incidence of the first performance of ultrasound (catheter winded and nodular mass) and mammography (nodular mass) had significantly difference among patients with DCIS, DCIS-Mi, and IDC (P <0.001).
conclusionsDifferent clinicopathological, immunohistochemical, and imaging features among DCIS, DCIS-Mi, and IDC indicate that they are distinct entities. A larger sample size is needed for further study.
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.