Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29094254›Full record

ArticleBreast cancer (Tokyo, Japan)2018

Comparison of CK-IHC assay on serial frozen sections, the OSNA assay, and in combination for intraoperative evaluation of SLN metastases in breast cancer.

Hideo Shigematsu, Shinji Ozaki, Daisuke Yasui, Junichi Zaitsu, Daiki Taniyama, Akihisa Saitou, Kazuya Kuraoka, Hiroyasu Yamashiro, Kiyomi Taniyama

Open access · hybridAbstract readComparative StudyEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Breast cancer (Tokyo, Japan), 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 39% 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, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Guideline
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Evolution of Frozen Section in Carcinoma Breast: Systematic Review.International journal of breast cancer · 2022
    Review
  8. 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

9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Hideo ShigematsuDepartment of Breast Surgery, National Hospital Organization Kure Medical Center and Chugoku Cancer Center, 3-1, Aoyama-cho, Kure, Hiroshima, 737-0023, Japan. shigematu1330@yahoo.co.jp.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9393-9655
Shinji OzakiDepartment of Breast Surgery, National Hospital Organization Kure Medical Center and Chugoku Cancer Center, 3-1, Aoyama-cho, Kure, Hiroshima, 737-0023, Japan.
Daisuke YasuiDepartment of Breast Surgery, National Hospital Organization Kure Medical Center and Chugoku Cancer Center, 3-1, Aoyama-cho, Kure, Hiroshima, 737-0023, Japan.
Junichi ZaitsuDepartment of Pathology, National Hospital Organization Kure Medical Center and Chugoku Cancer Center, Kure, Hiroshima, Japan.
Daiki TaniyamaDepartment of Pathology, National Hospital Organization Kure Medical Center and Chugoku Cancer Center, Kure, Hiroshima, Japan.
Akihisa SaitouDepartment of Pathology, National Hospital Organization Kure Medical Center and Chugoku Cancer Center, Kure, Hiroshima, Japan.
Kazuya KuraokaDepartment of Pathology, National Hospital Organization Kure Medical Center and Chugoku Cancer Center, Kure, Hiroshima, Japan.
Hiroyasu YamashiroDepartment of Breast Surgery, Tenri Hospital, Nara, Nara, Japan.
Kiyomi TaniyamaNational Hospital Organization Kure Medical Center and Chugoku Cancer Center, Kure, Hiroshima, Japan.
National Hospital Organization · JPTenri Hospital · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIntraoperative evaluations of sentinel lymph node (SLN) metastases are performed for providing appropriate and immediate axillary treatments in breast cancer patients who do not meet Z0011 criteria; however, standard intraoperative procedure has not yet been established.

methodsWe consecutively performed intraoperative evaluation for SLN metastases using both a cytokeratin immunohistochemistry (CK-IHC) assay on serial frozen sections and a one-step nucleic acid amplification (OSNA) assay of the remaining whole node in patients with invasive breast cancer. In this article, we compared the intraoperative diagnostic ability of CK-IHC assay, the OSNA assay, and in combination.

resultsBetween August 2009 and May 2017, 1,103 SLNs from 499 consecutive clinically node-negative invasive breast cancers were intraoperatively evaluated for SLN metastases using an OSNA and CK-IHC assay. The detection rates of SLN metastases by the OSNA and CK-IHC assays and in combination were 11.8, 12.1, and 14.5%, respectively. The concordance rate between the intraoperative SLN findings of the OSNA and CK-IHC assays was 94.9% (95% confidence interval 93.6-96.2%). The false negative rate for the OSNA assay was 3.1% (30/973), including 3 (0.3%) macrometastases and 27 (2.8%) micrometastases, and for the CK-IHC assay was 2.7% (26/969), including 1 (0.1%) OSNA ++ and 25 (2.6%) OSNA +.

conclusionsThe CK-IHC assay and the OSNA assay have compatible diagnostic abilities in intraoperative evaluations for SLN metastases. The low incidence of false negative results with limited disease burden suggests that both assays can be reliable techniques for intraoperative diagnoses of SLN metastases in breast cancer patients.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAged, 80 and overBiomarkers, TumorBreast NeoplasmsCarcinoma, Ductal, BreastCarcinoma, LobularFemaleFollow-Up StudiesFrozen SectionsHumansImmunohistochemistryIntraoperative PeriodKeratinsLymphatic MetastasisMiddle AgedBiomarkers, TumorKeratinsBreast cancerCK-IHCIntraoperative diagnosisOSNASLN

Identifiers

PMID29094254
PMCPMC5818575
OpenAlexW2766274758

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.