ArticleJournal of breast cancer2017
A Prognostic Model for Patients with Triple-Negative Breast Cancer: Importance of the Modified Nottingham Prognostic Index and Age.
Article in Journal of breast cancer, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 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
- Interfacial Stress Regulates Plasticity and Drug Resistance at the Breast Cancer-Host Interface.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2025Article
- Review
- Association of cyclooxygenase-2 expression with endoplasmic reticulum stress and autophagy in triple-negative breast cancer.PloS one · 2023Article
- Is it time to retire sentinel lymph node biopsy and use multi-omics prediction models?Annals of translational medicine · 2022Article
- Article
- A Novel lncRNA Panel for Risk Stratification and Immune Landscape in Breast Cancer Patients.International journal of general medicine · 2022Article
- Advancement of prognostic models in breast cancer: a narrative review.Gland surgery · 2021Review
- Clinicopathologic features and prognosis of triple-negative breast cancer in China: a retrospective cohort study of patients under 35 years old.International journal of clinical and experimental pathology · 2021Article
- Clinical features and their effect on outcomes of patients with triple negative breast cancer with or without lymph node involvement.The Journal of international medical research · 2020Article
- PTHrP, A Biomarker for CNS Metastasis in Triple-Negative Breast Cancer and Selection for Adjuvant Chemotherapy in Node-Negative Disease.JNCI cancer spectrum · 2020Article
- Review
- Nottingham Prognostic Index is an Applicable Prognostic Tool in Non-Metastatic Triple-Negative Breast CancerAsian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2019Article
- Relationship between Clinicopathologic Variables in Breast Cancer Overall Survival Using Biogeography-Based Optimization Algorithm.BioMed research international · 2019Article
- Clinical and pathological factors influencing survival in a large cohort of triple-negative breast cancer patients.BMC cancer · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeConsidering the distinctive biology of triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC), this study aimed to identify TNBC-specific prognostic factors and determine the prognostic value of the Nottingham Prognostic Index (NPI) and its variant indices.
methodsA total of 233 patients with newly diagnosed stage I to III TNBC from 2003 to 2012 were reviewed. We retrospectively analyzed the patients' demographics, clinicopathologic parameters, treatment, and survival outcomes. The NPI was calculated as follows: tumor size (cm)×0.2+node status+Scarff-Bloom-Richardson (SBR) grade. The modified NPI (MNPI) was obtained by adding the modified SBR grade rather than the SBR grade.
resultsThe median follow-up was 67.8 months. Five-year disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were 81.4% and 89.9%, respectively. Multivariate analyses showed that the MNPI was the most significant and common prognostic factor of DFS (
conclusionThe MNPI could be used to stratify patients with stage I to III TNBC according to prognosis. It was the most important prognosticator for both DFS and OS. The prognostic significance of young age for DFS differed by MNPI.
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.