ArticlePloS one2017
Decision impact and feasibility of different ASCO-recommended biomarkers in early breast cancer: Prospective comparison of molecular marker EndoPredict and protein marker uPA/PAI-1.
Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03503799 (Prospective Assessment of Disease Progression in Primary Breast Cancer Patients Undergoing EndoPredict® Gene Expression Testing - a Care Research Study), which is not on this map. Cited by 11 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.
Prospective Assessment of Disease Progression in Primary Breast Cancer Patients Undergoing EndoPredict® Gene Expression Testing - a Care Research Study
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Decision of adjuvant chemotherapy in intermediate risk luminal breast cancer patients: A prospective multicenter trial assessing the clinical and psychological impact of EndoPredict® (EpClin) use (UCBG 2-14).Breast (Edinburgh, Scotland) · 2020Trial
- Article
- Decision impact studies, evidence of clinical utility for genomic assays in cancer: A scoping review.PloS one · 2023Article
- Comparison of risk assessment in 1652 early ER positive, HER2 negative breast cancer in a real-world data set: classical pathological parameters vs. 12-gene molecular assay (EndoPredict).Breast cancer research and treatment · 2022Article
- First prospective outcome data for the second-generation multigene test Endopredict in ER-positive/HER2-negative breast cancer.Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2020Article
- Unmet Clinical Need: Developing Prognostic Biomarkers and Precision Medicine to Forecast Early Tumor Relapse, Detect Chemo-Resistance and Improve Overall Survival in High-Risk Breast Cancer.Annals of breast cancer and therapy · 2020Article
- Risk stratification in luminal-type breast cancer: Comparison of Ki-67 with EndoPredict test results.Breast (Edinburgh, Scotland) · 2020Article
- Article
- Gene Expression Profiling Tests for Early-Stage Invasive Breast Cancer: A Health Technology Assessment.Ontario health technology assessment series · 2020Article
- Article
- Decision of Adjuvant Systemic Treatment in HR+ HER2- Early Invasive Breast Cancer: Which Biomarkers Could Help?Cancer management and research · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAdjuvant therapy decisions in early breast cancer are based on accurate risk assessment. Urokinase plasminogen activator (uPA) and plaminogen activator inhibitor-1 (PAI-1) have been the first biomarkers in hormone receptor (HR) positive breast cancer to reach highest level of evidence. The EndoPredict test (EPclin) combines gene expression information with nodal status and tumor size. The aim of this prospective study was to compare uPA/PAI-1 and EPclin as prognostic biomarkers with regard to feasibility, risk stratification and impact on adjuvant therapy recommendation. MATERIALS AND
method395 patients with HR positive, HER2 negative, intermediate risk breast cancer were enrolled. Relations and concordance of histologic grading as well as EPclin and uPA/PAI-1 values were assessed by Spearman's rank correlation coefficient and Cohen's Kappa. To compare decision impact of EPclin and uPA/PAI-1 three independent case discussions were held: One with known uPA/PAI-1 and EPclin results, one blinded to EPclin alone and another one blinded to both EPclin and uPA/PAI-1.
resultsEPclin could be determined in all 395 (100%), uPA/PAI-1 in 190 (48%) of the tumor samples. EPclin allocated 250 patients (63%) to the low-risk group and 145 patients (37%) to the high-risk group, whereas uPA/PAI-1 allocated 88 patients (46%) to the low-risk group and 102 patients (54%) to the high-risk group. In 59% of cases, both tests showed concordant results. EPclin resulted more frequently in a change of therapy recommendation than the uPA/PAI-1 test (46% vs 24%). Recommendation of adjuvant chemotherapy (CTX) was abandoned twice as often by EPclin (45%) compared to uPA/PAI-1 (22%).
conclusionIn this first prospective comparison of EPclin and uPA/PAI-1 we found, that EPclin is superior to uPA/PAI-1 with respect to feasibility and decision impact. This leads to substantial avoidance of adjuvant CTX in endocrine-sensitive, HER2-negative breast cancer. Data collection for patients´ clinical outcome is ongoing.
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.