Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25972110›Full record

ArticleBMC cancer2015

The impact of HER2 phenotype of circulating tumor cells in metastatic breast cancer: a retrospective study in 107 patients.

Markus Wallwiener, Andreas Daniel Hartkopf, Sabine Riethdorf, Juliane Nees, Martin Ronald Sprick, Birgitt Schönfisch, Florin-Andrei Taran, Jörg Heil, Christof Sohn, Klaus Pantel and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC cancer, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 41 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
41citing papers in PubMed
4.7field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

41 citing papers in PubMed, 80 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. The journal of liquid biopsy · 2023
    Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
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

12 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Markus WallwienerDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 440, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany. markus.wallwiener@med.uni-heidelberg.de.
Andreas Daniel HartkopfDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Tübingen, Calwerstraße 7, 72076, Tübingen, Germany. andreas.hartkopf@med.uni-tuebingen.de.
Sabine RiethdorfDepartment of Tumor Biology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistraße 52, 20246, Hamburg, Germany. s.riethdorf@uke.uni-hamburg.de.
Juliane NeesNational Center for Tumor Diseases, Im Neuenheimer Feld 460, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany. juliane.nees@t-online.de.
Martin Ronald SprickHeidelberg Institute for Stem Cell Technology and Experimental Medicine (HI-STEM gGmbH), Im Neuenheimer Feld 280, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany. martin.sprick@hi-stem.de.
Birgitt SchönfischDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Tübingen, Calwerstraße 7, 72076, Tübingen, Germany. birgitt.schoenfisch@uni-tuebingen.de.
Florin-Andrei TaranDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Tübingen, Calwerstraße 7, 72076, Tübingen, Germany. florin-andrei.taran@med.uni-tuebingen.de.
Jörg HeilDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 440, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany. joerg.heil@med.uni-heidelberg.de.
Christof SohnDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 440, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany. christof.sohn@med.uni-heidelberg.de.
Klaus PantelDepartment of Tumor Biology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistraße 52, 20246, Hamburg, Germany. pantel@uke.de.
Andreas TrumppHeidelberg Institute for Stem Cell Technology and Experimental Medicine (HI-STEM gGmbH), Im Neuenheimer Feld 280, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany. a.trumpp@dkfz.de.
Andreas SchneeweissDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 440, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany. andreas.schneeweiss@med.uni-heidelberg.de.
Heidelberg University · DEUniversity of Tübingen · DEHeidelberg Institute for Stem Cell Technology and Experimental Medicine · DENational Center for Tumor Diseases · DEUniversity Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn metastatic breast cancer (MBC), antigen profiles of metastatic tissue and primary tumor differ in up to 20 % of patients. Reassessment of predictive markers, including human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) expression, might help to optimize MBC treatment. While tissue sampling is invasive and often difficult to repeat, circulating tumor cell (CTC) analysis requires only a blood sample and might provide an easy-to-repeat, real-time "liquid biopsy" approach. The present retrospective study was conducted to compare HER2 expression in primary tumors, metastatic tissue, and circulating tumor cells (CTCs) from MBC patients and to analyze the potential impact of HER2 overexpression by CTCs on progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in MBC.

methodsCTC-positive (five or more CTCs/7.5 mL blood; CellSearch®, Janssen Diagnostics) MBC patients starting a new line of systemic treatment were eligible for the study. HER2 status of CTCs was determined by immunofluorescence (CellSearch®). HER2 status of primary (PRIM) and metastatic (MET) tumor tissue was determined by immunohistochemistry. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and Kaplan-Meier plots.

resultsOne hundred seven patients (median age (range) 57 (33-81) years) were included. 100/107 (93%) patients were followed-up for a median [95% confidence interval (CI)] of 28.5 [25.1-40.1] months. Of 37/107 (35%) CTC-HER2-positive patients only 10 (27%) were PRIM-HER2-positive. 6/46 (13%) patients were MET-HER2-positive; only 2/10 (20%) CTC-HER2-positive patients were MET-HER2-positive. Overall accuracy between CTC-HER2 expression and PRIM-HER2 and MET-HER2 status was 69% and 74%, respectively. Kaplan-Meier plots of PFS and OS by CTC-HER2 status revealed significantly longer median [95% CI] PFS of CTC-HER2-positive versus CTC-HER2-negative patients (7.4 [4.7-13.7] versus 4.34 [3.5-5.9] months; p = 0.035). CTC-HER2-positive status showed no significant difference for OS (13.7 [7.7-30.0] versus 8.7 [5.9-15.3] months; p = 0.287).

conclusionsHER2 status can change during the course of breast cancer. CTC phenotyping may serve as an easy-to-perform "liquid biopsy" to reevaluate HER2 status and potentially guide treatment decisions. Further, prospective studies are needed.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAged, 80 and overBiomarkers, TumorBreast NeoplasmsDisease-Free SurvivalErb-b2 Receptor Tyrosine KinasesFemaleHumansKaplan-Meier EstimateMiddle AgedNeoplastic Cells, CirculatingPhenotypePrognosisRetrospective StudiesBiomarkers, TumorERBB2 protein, humanErb-b2 Receptor Tyrosine Kinases

Identifiers

PMID25972110
PMCPMC4435916
OpenAlexW1781298895

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.