ArticleBreast cancer research and treatment2016
Utilization and impact of 21-gene recurrence score assay for breast cancer in clinical practice across the United States: lessons learned from the 2010 to 2012 National Cancer Data Base analysis.
Article in Breast cancer research and treatment, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 38 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
38 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Socioeconomic- and Insurance-Based Inequities in Oncotype DX Testing and Score-Guided Treatment.Cancer medicine · 2025Article
- Article
- Computational pathology for breast cancer: Where do we stand for prognostic applications?Breast (Edinburgh, Scotland) · 2025Review
- Article
- The utility of the 21-gene Oncotype DX Breast Recurrence ScoreContemporary oncology (Poznan, Poland) · 2024Article
- Differential distribution of actual and surrogate oncotype DX recurrence scores in breast cancer patients by age, menopausal status, race, and body mass index.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2023Article
- Clinicopathological Factors Associated with Oncotype DX Risk Group in Patients with ER+/HER2- Breast Cancer.Cancers · 2023Article
- Chemotherapy refusal and subsequent survival in healthy older women with high genomic risk estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2023Article
- Sociodemographic and clinical factors associated with receipt of biomarker testing in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.Cancer medicine · 2023Article
- A Novel Surrogate Nomogram Capable of Predicting OncotypeDX Recurrence Score©.Journal of personalized medicine · 2022Article
- Analyzing Precision Medicine Utilization with Real-World Data: A Scoping Review.Journal of personalized medicine · 2022Article
- Grading of invasive breast carcinoma: the way forward.Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology · 2022Review
- Supervised machine learning model to predict oncotype DX risk category in patients over age 50.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2022Article
- Hospital Rurality and Gene Expression Profiling for Early-Stage Breast Cancer among Iowa Residents (2010-2018).The breast journal · 2022Article
- Risk evaluation of early-stage hormone receptor-positive and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative breast cancer patients: a population-based study from Taiwan.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2021Article
- Identifying Clinicopathological Factors Associated with Oncotype DXJournal of personalized medicine · 2021Article
- Efficacy of adjuvant chemotherapy stratified by age and the 21-gene recurrence score in estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer.BMC cancer · 2021Article
- Oncotype DX Test Receipt among Latina/Hispanic Women with Early Invasive Breast Cancer in New Jersey: A Registry-Based Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- A nomogram to predict the high-risk RS in HR+/HER2-breast cancer patients older than 50 years of age.Journal of translational medicine · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of our study is to investigate patient selection for the 21-gene recurrence score assay (RS) for breast cancer (BC) and the RS impact on chemotherapy administration (Chemo) in clinical practice across the United States through the retrospective observational study of National Cancer Data Base (NCDB) patients from 2010 to 2012. NCDB captures ~70 % of all newly diagnosed malignancies in the USA annually. The 2010-2012 period depicts data from the beginning of the NCDB that required recording of molecular assays and their data release in April 2015. De-identified demographic and clinical variables of patients that had RS results were analyzed. 513,080 patients had BC; 406,525 were estrogen receptor-positive (ER+). 74,334/91,651 patients with RS recorded as a numerical value (0-100) were analyzed (18.2 % of ER+). Patients' ages ranged from 18 to 90 (mean = 58.8, median = 59); 99.1 % were females. Patients of Caucasian race, from regions with <7 % having no high school education, and >$63,000 median household income were more likely to be tested than patients of other races, education, or income (p < 0.001). 58.1 % of tests were performed in ER+/lymph node-negative/>1 cm tumors; 16.4 % included ≥N1 disease; 9.9 % included T1a, T3, Stage III and IV, or HER2-positive cancers. Low-risk RS result had 92.2 % negative predictive value for no Chemo. Intermediate-risk RS result had 40.1 % positive predictive value (PPV); high-risk RS had 81.2 % PPV for Chemo. RS is obtained in ~1/5 of ER + BC patients across the USA. Further studies investigating influence and implementation of the newest evidence-based management guidelines regarding patients' selection for RS test and chemotherapy administration upon obtaining of test results are warranted.
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.