ArticlePloS one2016
Stratification of Prognosis of Triple-Negative Breast Cancer Patients Using Combinatorial Biomarkers.
Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
21 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Prognostic Value of Ki-67 in Patients With Resected Triple-Negative Breast Cancer: A Meta-Analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2019Pooled it
- Prospective Validation of Diagnostic Tumor Biomarkers in Men Treated With Radiotherapy for Prostate Cancer.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2017Trial
- Article
- Upregulation of CENPM promotes breast carcinogenesis by altering immune infiltration.BMC cancer · 2024Article
- Expression of the Immunohistochemical Markers CK5, CD117, and EGFR in Molecular Subtypes of Breast Cancer Correlated with Prognosis.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Expression of neuroendocrine markers predicts increased survival in triple-negative breast cancer patients.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2023Article
- Racial Disparity in Quadruple Negative Breast Cancer: Aggressive Biology and Potential Therapeutic Targeting and Prevention.Cancers · 2022Review
- Triple-Negative Breast Cancer Analysis Based on Metabolic Gene Classification and Immunotherapy.Frontiers in public health · 2022Article
- The Risk Correlation between N7-Methylguanosine Modification-Related lncRNAs and Survival Prognosis of Oral Squamous Cell Carcinoma Based on Comprehensive Bioinformatics Analysis.Applied bionics and biomechanics · 2022Article
- Multiplexed imaging analysis of the tumor-immune microenvironment reveals predictors of outcome in triple-negative breast cancer.Communications biology · 2021Article
- The prognostic and predictive significance of cytokeratin 5/6 and epidermal growth factor receptor in metastatic triple-negative breast cancer treated with maintenance capecitabine.Translational cancer research · 2021Article
- Epigenetic Modulation of SPCA2 Reverses Epithelial to Mesenchymal Transition in Breast Cancer Cells.Cancers · 2021Article
- Quadruple-negative breast cancer: novel implications for a new disease.Breast cancer research : BCR · 2020Review
- Double-positive in triple-negative? How significant is basal cytokeratin expression in breast cancer?Medical journal, Armed Forces India · 2020Article
- CLCA2 expression is associated with survival among African American women with triple negative breast cancer.PloS one · 2020Article
- Elevated levels of eEF1A2 protein expression in triple negative breast cancer relate with poor prognosis.PloS one · 2019Article
- Caveolin-1: a multifaceted driver of breast cancer progression and its application in clinical treatment.OncoTargets and therapy · 2019Review
- Prognostic significance of CD117 expression andOncology letters · 2018Article
- Androgen receptor positive triple negative breast cancer: Clinicopathologic, prognostic, and predictive features.PloS one · 2018Article
- Metronomic chemotherapy for non-metastatic triple negative breast cancer: Selection is the key.World journal of clinical oncology · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTriple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) is highly diverse group of cancers, and generally considered an aggressive disease associated with poor survival. Stratification of TNBC is highly desired for both prognosis and treatment decisions to identify patients who may benefit from less aggressive therapy.
methodsThis study retrieved 192 consecutive non-metastasis TNBC patients who had undergone a resection of a primary tumor from 2008 to 2012. All samples were negative for ER, PR, and HER2/neu. Disease-free-survival (DFS) and overall-survival (OS) were evaluated for expression of immunohistochemical biomarkers (P53, Ki-67, CK5/6 and EGFR), as well as clinicopathological variables including age, tumor size, grade, lymph node status, pathologic tumor and nodal stages. The cutoff values of the basal biomarkers, EGFR and CK5/6, were estimated by time-dependent ROC curves. The prognostic values of combinatorial variables were identified by univariate and multivariate Cox analysis. Patients were stratified into different risk groups based on expression status of identified prognostic variables.
resultsMedian age was 57 years (range, 28-92 years). Patients' tumor stage and nodal stage were significantly associated with OS and DFS. EGFR and CK5/6 were significant prognostic variables at cutoff points of 15% (p = 0.001, AUC = 0.723), and 50% (p = 0.006, AUC = 0.675), respectively. Multivariate Cox analysis identified five significant variables: EGFR (p = 0.016), CK5/6 (p = 0.018), Ki-67 (p = 0.048), tumor stage (p = 0.010), and nodal stage (p = 0.003). Patients were stratified into low basal (EGFR≤15% and CK5/6≤50%) and high basal (EGFR>15% and/or CK5/6>50%) expression groups. In the low basal expression group, patients with low expressions of Ki-67, low tumor and nodal stage had significantly better survival than those with high expressions/stages of three variables, log-rank p = 0.015 (100% vs 68% at 50 months). In the high basal expression group, patient with high basal expression of both biomarkers (EGFR >15% and CK5/6 >50%) had worse survival (mean DFS = 25 months, 41.7% event rate) than those patient with high expression of either one marker (mean DFS = 34 months, 25.5% event rate).
conclusionsImmunoexpression of basal biomarkers, EGFR and CK5/6, is useful in predicting survival of TNBC patients. Integrated with Ki-67, tumor and nodal stages, combinatorial biomarker analysis provides a feasible clinical solution to stratify patient risks and help clinical decision-making with respect to selecting the appropriate therapies for individual patients.
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.