Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26244666›Full record

ArticlePloS one2015

Protease Activated Receptors 1 and 2 Correlate Differently with Breast Cancer Aggressiveness Depending on Tumor ER Status.

Jon Lidfeldt, Pär-Ola Bendahl, Carina Forsare, Per Malmström, Mårten Fernö, Mattias Belting

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 35% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. GPCR Modulation in Breast Cancer.International journal of molecular sciences · 2018
    Review
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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Jon LidfeldtDepartment of Clinical Sciences, Section of Oncology and Pathology, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.
Pär-Ola BendahlDepartment of Clinical Sciences, Section of Oncology and Pathology, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.
Carina ForsareDepartment of Clinical Sciences, Section of Oncology and Pathology, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.
Per MalmströmDepartment of Clinical Sciences, Section of Oncology and Pathology, Lund University, Lund, Sweden; Department of Oncology, Skåne University Hospital, Lund, Sweden.
Mårten FernöDepartment of Clinical Sciences, Section of Oncology and Pathology, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.
Mattias BeltingDepartment of Clinical Sciences, Section of Oncology and Pathology, Lund University, Lund, Sweden; Department of Oncology, Skåne University Hospital, Lund, Sweden.
Lund University · SESkåne University Hospital · SE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Experimental models implicate protease activated receptors (PARs) as important sensors of the proteolytic tumor microenvironment during breast cancer development. However, the role of the major PARs, PAR-1 and PAR-2, in human breast tumors remains to be elucidated. Here, we have investigated how PAR-1 and PAR-2 protein expression correlate with established clinicopathological variables and patient outcome in a well-characterized cohort of 221 breast cancer patients. Univariable and multivariable hazard ratios (HR) were estimated by the Cox proportional hazards model, distant disease-free survival (DDFS) and overall survival by the Kaplan-Meier method, and survival in different strata was determined by the log-rank test. Associations between PARs and clinicopathological variables were analyzed using Pearson's χ2-test. We find that PAR-2 associates with DDFS (HR = 3.1, P = 0.003), whereas no such association was found with PAR-1 (HR = 1.2, P = 0.6). Interestingly, the effect of PAR-2 was confined to the ER-positive sub-group (HR = 5.5, P = 0.003 vs. HR = 1.2 in ER-negative; P = 0.045 for differential effect), and PAR-2 was an independent prognostic factor specifically in ER-positive tumors (HR = 3.9, P = 0.045). On the contrary, PAR-1 correlated with worse prognosis specifically in the ER-negative group (HR = 2.6, P = 0.069 vs. HR = 0.5, P = 0.19 in ER-positive; P = 0.026 for differential effect). This study provides novel insight into the respective roles of PAR-1 and PAR-2 in human breast cancer and suggests a hitherto unknown association between PARs and ER signaling that warrants further investigation.

Indexed as

AdultBreast NeoplasmsCohort StudiesFemaleHumansImmunohistochemistryKaplan-Meier EstimateMiddle AgedPrognosisProportional Hazards ModelsReceptor, PAR-1Receptor, PAR-2Receptors, EstrogenSignal TransductionTissue Array AnalysisReceptor, PAR-1Receptor, PAR-2Receptors, Estrogen

Identifiers

PMID26244666
PMCPMC4526525
OpenAlexW1927288480

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.