ReviewDer Pathologe2015
[Molecular pathology for breast cancer: Importance of the gene expression profile].
Review in Der Pathologe, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03503799 (Prospective Assessment of Disease Progression in Primary Breast Cancer Patients Undergoing EndoPredict® Gene Expression Testing - a Care Research Study), which is not on this map. Cited by 5 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.
Prospective Assessment of Disease Progression in Primary Breast Cancer Patients Undergoing EndoPredict® Gene Expression Testing - a Care Research Study
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Use of the Gene Expression Test ProsignaBreast care (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Six novel immunoglobulin genes as biomarkers for better prognosis in triple-negative breast cancer by gene co-expression network analysis.Scientific reports · 2019Article
- Eugenol alleviated breast precancerous lesions through HER2/PI3K-AKT pathway-induced cell apoptosis and S-phase arrest.Oncotarget · 2017Article
- An international comparability study on quantification of mRNA gene expression ratios: CCQM-P103.1.Biomolecular detection and quantification · 2016Article
- Tumor-Infiltrating Lymphocytes: A Promising Biomarker in Breast Cancer.Breast care (Basel, Switzerland) · 2016Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Gene expression arrays are currently used to guide therapy decisions in breast cancer. The indications for gene expression tests are especially important in the group of hormone receptor negative, HER2 positive tumors to decide whether endocrine therapy alone is sufficient or additional chemotherapy is necessary. In this group of luminal tumors conventional clinicopathological parameters are often not suitable to select patients who would benefit from an endocrine therapy alone. Gene expression tests can provide additional information and, therefore, support decision-making and avoid unnecessary chemotherapy. There are a variety of test systems available which poses the questions of which tests should be selected for which patients and how the test results should be evaluated in a direct comparison. This report provides information about three currently available gene expression tests (i.e. OncotypeDx®, Endopredict® and PAM50/Prosigna®), comments on similarities and differences and discusses the impact on therapy decisions. The focus of this article is on a discussion of clinical studies that have compared the different molecular tests in the same clinical study cohort. These investigations allow a first comparative evaluation of the various assays for breast cancer.
Indexed as
Identifiers
25836324What 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.