Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26424167›Full record

ArticleBreast cancer research and treatment2015

Molecular subtyping improves diagnostic stratification of patients with primary breast cancer into prognostically defined risk groups.

Katharine Yao, Robert Goldschmidt, Mary Turk, Jelle Wesseling, Lisette Stork-Sloots, Femke de Snoo, Massimo Cristofanilli

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Breast cancer research and treatment, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Clinical Implications of Breast Cancer Intrinsic Subtypes.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2025
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Breast cancer subtype discrimination using standardized 4-IHC and digital image analysis.Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology · 2018
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

7 authors.

Katharine YaoNorthShore University HealthSystem, 2650 Ridge Ave. Suite 1155, Evanston, IL, 60201, USA. kyao@northshore.org.
Robert GoldschmidtNorthShore University HealthSystem, 2650 Ridge Ave. Suite 1155, Evanston, IL, 60201, USA.
Mary TurkNorthShore University HealthSystem, 2650 Ridge Ave. Suite 1155, Evanston, IL, 60201, USA.
Jelle WesselingNetherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Lisette Stork-SlootsAgendia NV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Femke de SnooAgendia NV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. fdesnoo@medex15.com.
Massimo CristofanilliFox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA.

Funding

Tumor Environment and Metastasis (TEAM) Research ProgramP30CA060553 · NCI · NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY AT CHICAGO · PI Daniela E Matei · 1993 to 2026
$153.9M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA060553
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Combined use of MammaPrint and a molecular subtyping profile (BluePrint) identifies disease subgroups with marked differences in long-term outcome and response to neo-adjuvant therapy. The aim of this study was to evaluate the prognostic value of molecular subtyping using MammaPrint and BluePrint in women with early-stage breast cancer (BC) treated at US institutions following National Comprehensive Cancer Network standard guidelines. Tumor samples were collected from stage 1-2B consecutively diagnosed BC patients (n = 373) who underwent lumpectomy or mastectomy with an axillary staging procedure between 1992 and 2010 at two institutes (NorthShore University HealthSystem and Fox Chase Cancer Center) in the United States of America, with a median follow-up time of 9.5 years. MammaPrint low-risk patients had a 10-year DMFS of 96 % (95 %CI 92.8-99.4), while MammaPrint high-risk patients had a 10-year DMFS of 87 % (95 %CI 81.9-92.1) with a hazard ratio of 3.62 (95 %CI 1.38-9.50) (p = 0.005). Uni- and multivariate analyses included age, tumor size, grade, ER, and Her2; in multivariate analysis, MammaPrint reached near-significance (HR 3.01; p 0.08). When comparing BluePrint molecular subtyping with clinical stratification, the prognosis (10-year DMFS) was significantly different in 10-year DMFS between the different molecular subtypes (p < 0.001). This retrospective study with 10-year follow-up data provides valuable insight into prognosis of patients with primary BC comparing clinical with molecular subtyping. The BluePrint molecular stratification assay identifies patients with significantly different outcomes compared with standard clinical molecular stratification.

Indexed as

PrognosisAdultAgedAged, 80 and overBiomarkers, TumorBreast NeoplasmsErb-b2 Receptor Tyrosine KinasesFemaleGene Expression Regulation, NeoplasticHumansKaplan-Meier EstimateMiddle AgedMolecular TypingReceptors, EstrogenReceptors, ProgesteroneBiomarkers, TumorERBB2 protein, humanErb-b2 Receptor Tyrosine KinasesReceptors, EstrogenReceptors, ProgesteroneBreast cancerMolecular assayMolecular subtypingPrognosis

Identifiers

PMID26424167
PMCPMC4621695

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.