Trial reportBioMed research international2014
Evaluation of two different analytical methods for circulating tumor cell detection in peripheral blood of patients with primary breast cancer.
Trial report in BioMed research international, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trial
- Role of Epithelial-to-Mesenchymal Transition for the Generation of Circulating Tumors Cells and Cancer Cell Dissemination.Cancers · 2022Review
- IsoMAG-An Automated System for the Immunomagnetic Isolation of Squamous Cell Carcinoma-Derived Circulating Tumor Cells.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Article
- Review
- Nano Meets Micro-Translational Nanotechnology in Medicine: Nano-Based Applications for Early Tumor Detection and Therapy.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Review
- Is small smarter? Nanomaterial-based detection and elimination of circulating tumor cells: current knowledge and perspectives.International journal of nanomedicine · 2019Review
- Detection of human mammaglobin mRNA in breast cancer cells among Vietnamese women.Breast cancer (Dove Medical Press) · 2019Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEvidence is accumulating that circulating tumor cells (CTC) out of peripheral blood can serve as prognostic marker not only in metastatic but also in early breast cancer (BC). Various methods are available to detect CTC. Comparisons between the different techniques, however, are rare. MATERIAL AND
methodsWe evaluate two different methods for CTC enrichment and detection in primary BC patients: the FDA-approved CellSearch System (CSS; Veridex, Warren, USA) and a manual immunocytochemistry (MICC). The cut-off value for positivity was ≥1 CTC.
resultsThe two different nonoverlapping patient cohorts evaluated with one or the other method were well balanced regarding common clinical parameters. Before adjuvant CHT 21.1% (416 out of 1972) and 20.6% (247 out of 1198) of the patients were CTC-positive, while after CHT 22.5% (359 out of 1598) and 16.6% (177 out of 1066) of the patients were CTC-positive using CSS or MICC, respectively. CTC positivity rate before CHT was thus similar and not significantly different (P = 0.749), while CTC positivity rate immediately after CHT was significantly lower using MICC compared to CSS (P < 0.001).
conclusionUsing CSS or MICC for CTC detection, we found comparable prevalence of CTC before but not after adjuvant CHT.
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.