ArticleAnnals of surgical treatment and research2016
Biologic subtype is a more important prognostic factor than nodal involvement in patients with stages I and II breast carcinoma.
Article in Annals of surgical treatment and research, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Comparison of Genomic Profiling Data with Clinical Parameters: Implications for Breast Cancer Prognosis.Cancers · 2022Article
- Breast cancer metastasis: Is it a matter of OMICS and proper ex-vivo models?Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2022Review
- Omission of axillary lymph node dissection in patients who underwent total mastectomy with 1 or 2 metastatic lymph nodes.Annals of surgical treatment and research · 2020Article
- Outcomes of Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy Using Blue Dye Method for Early Breast Cancer - A Single-Institution Experience in the Philippines.Breast cancer (Dove Medical Press) · 2020Article
- Associations between gene expression profiles of invasive breast cancer and Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System MRI lexicon.Annals of surgical treatment and research · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeNodal infiltration has been one of the most important prognostic factors in breast cancer. In recent decades, risk stratification has greatly changed, and is applied in accordance with hormone receptor and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) status. We compared the prognostic power of tumor subtype to nodal involvement in early breast cancer.
methodsWe reviewed the medical records of 505 patients who had curative surgery for stage I or II breast cancer. We analyzed clinicopathologic factors according to tumor subtype and nodal involvement. Tumors were classified into 4 subtypes according to immunohistochemical status of estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, HER2, and Ki67 labeling index. Disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival were analyzed.
resultsThere were 363 node-negative patients (71.9%) and 142 node-positive patients (28.1%). Luminal A, Luminal B, HER2, and triple-negative breast cancer subtypes were composed of 207 (41.0%), 147 (29.1%), 42 (8.3%), and 109 patients (21.6%), respectively. The median follow-up period was 89.5 months. Node negative-luminal A subtype showed the best prognosis with regard to 5-year DFS, and the pN1-triple negative subtype was associated with the shortest DFS (95.1% vs. 67.8%; hazard ratio, 9.554; P < 0.001). However, the node negative-triple negative subtype was associated with a worse 5-year DFS than the pN1-luminal A subtype ([86.4%; hazard ratio, 2.647; P = 0.048] vs. [93.2%; hazard ratio, 2.061; P = 0.194]).
conclusionNode negative-triple negative breast cancer was associated with a poorer prognosis than pN1-luminal A subtype. Tumor subtype has greater prognostic power compared to nodal status in early breast cancer.
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.