ArticleOncotarget2015
DNA repair prognostic index modelling reveals an essential role for base excision repair in influencing clinical outcomes in ER negative and triple negative breast cancers.
Article in Oncotarget, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Phase II study of neratinib in older adults with HER2 amplified or HER2/3 mutated metastatic breast cancer.Journal of geriatric oncology · 2021Trial
- Cancer prognosis using base excision repair genes.Molecules and cells · 2025Review
- Computational analysis for identification of the extracellular matrix molecules involved in endometrial cancer progression.PloS one · 2020Article
- The relationship of CDK18 expression in breast cancer to clinicopathological parameters and therapeutic response.Oncotarget · 2018Article
- Potential options for managing LOX+ ER- breast cancer patients.Oncotarget · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Stratification of oestrogen receptor (ER) negative and triple negative breast cancers (TNBCs) is urgently needed. In the current study, a cohort of 880 ER- (including 635 TNBCs) was immuno-profiled for a panel of DNA repair proteins including: Pol β, FEN1, APE1, XRCC1, SMUG1, PARP1, BRCA1, ATR, ATM, DNA-PKcs, Chk1, Chk2, p53, and TOPO2. Multivariate Cox proportional hazards models (with backward stepwise exclusion of these factors, using a criterion of p < 0.05 for retention of factors in the model) were used to identify factors that were independently associated with clinical outcomes. XRCC1 (p = 0.002), pol β (p = 0.032) FEN1 (p = 0.001) and BRCA1 (p = 0.040) levels were independently associated with poor BCSS. Subsequently, DNA repair index prognostic (DRPI) scores for breast cancer specific survival (BCSS) were calculated and two prognostic groups (DRPI-PGs) were identified. Patients in prognostic group 2 (DRPI-PG2) have higher risk of death (p < 0.001). Furthermore, in DRPI-PG2 patients, exposure to anthracycline reduced the risk of death [(HR (95% CI) = 0.79 (0.64-0.98), p = 0.032) by 21-26%. In addition, DRPI-PG2 patients have adverse clinicopathological features including higher grade, lympho-vascular invasion, Her-2 positive phenotype, compared to those in DRPI-PG1 (p < 0.01). Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves indicated that the DRPI outperformed the currently used prognostic factors and adding DRPI to lymph node stage significantly improved their performance as a predictor for BCSS [p < 0.00001, area under curve (AUC) = 0.70]. BER strongly influences pathogenesis of ER- and TNBCs. The DRPI accurately predicts BCSS and can also serve as a valuable prognostic and predictive tool for TNBCs.
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.