Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28573512›Full record

ArticleVirchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology2017

Prognostic impact of HER-2 Subclonal Amplification in breast cancer.

Enrico Di Oto, Alba A Brandes, Maria C Cucchi, Maria P Foschini

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 37% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. HER2 in situ hybridization test in breast cancer: quantifying margins of error and genetic heterogeneity.Modern pathology : an official journal of the United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology, Inc · 2021
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. [Expression of G9a in breast cancer and its effect on proliferation of breast cancer cellsNan fang yi ke da xue xue bao = Journal of Southern Medical University · 2019
    Article
  9. 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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Enrico Di OtoSection of Anatomic Pathology, Department of Biomedical and Neuromotor Sciences, University of Bologna, 40139, Bologna, Italy.
Alba A BrandesDepartment of Medical Oncology, Bellaria Hospital, AUSL Bologna-IRCCS Institute of Neurological Sciences, 40139, Bologna, Italy.
Maria C CucchiBreast Surgery Unit, Bellaria Hospital, 40139, Bologna, Italy.
Maria P FoschiniSection of Anatomic Pathology, Department of Biomedical and Neuromotor Sciences, University of Bologna, 40139, Bologna, Italy. mariapia.foschini@unibo.it.
University of Bologna · ITInstitute of Neurological Sciences · ITOspedale Bellaria · IT

Funding

Università di Bologna Fundamentally Oriented Research Funds (RFO)
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The presence of a limited number of cells with HER-2 amplification (Subclonal Amplification) in breast carcinomas is occasionally encountered, but its prognostic impact is poorly known. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the prognostic impact of HER-2 Subclonal Amplification in a retrospective series of breast cancers. Accordingly, 81 consecutive breast carcinomas showing HER-2 Subclonal Amplification were obtained from the histology files (case series). These cases were subdivided into two groups: (a) those cases in which the HER-2 Subclonal Amplification was consonant to the accepted criteria for amplification, showing clusters of amplified cells, and (b) those cases with rare HER-2 Subclonal Amplification that did not reflect the accepted criteria for amplification, showing scattered amplified cells only. The incidence of metastases and late recurrences of the case series was compared with a series composed of 109 consecutive cases, being HER-2 homogeneous (comprising 14 Amplified and 95 Non-Amplified cases), matched for grade and stage (control series). It appeared that cases showing Subclonal Amplification had an incidence of metastases intermediate between the cases Amplified and Non-Amplified. Specifically, Subclonal Amplification with clustered cells had a lower incidence of metastases than Amplified cases (12.9 versus 21.4%). On the contrary, Subclonal Amplification with scattered cells showed an incidence of metastases higher than Non-Amplified cases (14 versus 9.47%). In addition, patients Subclonal Amplification with clustered cells, who were treated with the specific monoclonal antibody, had a lower incidence of metastases than patients showing Subclonal Amplification with scattered cells, who did not receive target therapy. These data, together with those recently published, indicate that Subclonal Amplification has an impact on prognosis and should be taken into consideration to correctly plan the treatment of breast cancer patients.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAged, 80 and overBiomarkers, TumorBreast NeoplasmsErb-b2 Receptor Tyrosine KinasesFemaleGene AmplificationGenes, erbB-2HumansMiddle AgedPrognosisRetrospective StudiesYoung AdultBiomarkers, TumorERBB2 protein, humanErb-b2 Receptor Tyrosine KinasesAmplificationBreast cancerHER-2PrognosisSubclonesTherapy

Identifiers

PMID28573512
OpenAlexW2620558762

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.