Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26706834›Full record

ArticleMolecular oncology2016

The clinical prognostic value of molecular intrinsic tumor subtypes in older breast cancer patients: A FOCUS study analysis.

Charla C Engels, Mandy Kiderlen, Esther Bastiaannet, Antien L Mooyaart, Ronald van Vlierberghe, Vincent T H B M Smit, Peter J K Kuppen, Cornelis J H van de Velde, G J Liefers

Open access · bronzeAbstract readMulticenter Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Molecular oncology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 23% 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. 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

9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Charla C EngelsDepartment of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Mandy KiderlenDepartment of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands; Department of Geriatrics and Gerontology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Esther BastiaannetDepartment of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands; Department of Geriatrics and Gerontology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Antien L MooyaartDepartment of Pathology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Ronald van VlierbergheDepartment of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Vincent T H B M SmitDepartment of Pathology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Peter J K KuppenDepartment of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Cornelis J H van de VeldeDepartment of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
G J LiefersDepartment of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands. Electronic address: g.j.liefers@lumc.nl.
Leiden University Medical Center · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionIt was recently proposed that the molecular breast tumor subtypes are differently distributed in the elderly breast cancer patients, and also lack prognostic value. Given the limited number of elderly patients in previous studies, the aim of this study was to determine the prognostic effect of the molecular intrinsic subtypes in a large older breast cancer population. MATERIAL AND

methodOlder breast cancer patients with invasive, non-metastatic breast cancer with tumor material available for immunohistochemical determination of Ki67, EGFR, CK5/6 and HER-2 were included. ER and PR expression was retrieved from the pathology report. Molecular subtypes were: Luminal A, Luminal B, ERBB2, Basal-like and Unclassified. Primary endpoint was Relapse Free Period (RFP), taking into account the competing risk of mortality, and adjusted for the most important patient, tumor and treatment characteristics. Secondary endpoint was Relative Survival (RS).

resultsOverall, 1362 patients were included. Patients with a Luminal A subtype had the lowest risk of recurrence (11% at 5 yrs). Patients with a Basal (24% at 5yrs) or ERBB2 (34% at 5yrs) molecular breast tumor subtype had the highest risk of recurrence. The ERBB2 subtype had the worst prognosis in terms of RFP (SHR 2.07, 95% CI 1.35-3.20; p = 0.001). The worst RS was again observed for the ERBB2 subtype (48% at 10 yrs). In multivariable analyses, the relative excess risk of death for all molecular subtypes was significantly worse compared to the Luminal A subtype.

conclusionMolecular intrinsic breast tumor subtypes have significant prognostic value in the elderly population, even after taking competing mortality into account.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsAgedAged, 80 and overBiomarkers, TumorDisease-Free SurvivalFemaleHumansImmunohistochemistryNeoplasm ProteinsSurvival RateBiomarkers, TumorNeoplasm ProteinsBreast cancerClinical outcomeCompeting mortalityElderlyMolecular subtypesPrognostication

Identifiers

PMID26706834
PMCPMC5423141
OpenAlexW2180467298

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.