Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29337092›Full record

ArticleThe Lancet. Oncology2018

Germline BRCA mutation and outcome in young-onset breast cancer (POSH): a prospective cohort study.

Ellen R Copson, Tom C Maishman, Will J Tapper, Ramsey I Cutress, Stephanie Greville-Heygate, Douglas G Altman, Bryony Eccles, Sue Gerty, Lorraine T Durcan, Louise Jones and 14 more

Registry-linked trialOpen access · hybridAbstract readComparative StudyMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in The Lancet. Oncology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04533555 (Randomized Trial of Universal vs. Guideline-directed Germline Testing Among Young Adults With Cancer), which is not on this map. Cited by 262 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
262citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
35.3field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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.

NCT04533555 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2020, after this paper: background citation

Randomized Trial of Universal vs. Guideline-directed Germline Testing Among Young Adults With Cancer

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of PennsylvaniaRan2020 to 2025Enrolled749ConditionsCancerArmsBroad gene panel for young adult cancers, Standard
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

262 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 488 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Observational
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

202 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

24 authors at 11 institutions in 3 countries.

Ellen R CopsonCancer Sciences Academic Unit, Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Tom C MaishmanSouthampton Clinical Trials Unit, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Will J TapperGenetic Epidemiology and Genomic Informatics Group, Human Genetics, Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Ramsey I CutressCancer Sciences Academic Unit, Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Stephanie Greville-HeygateCancer Sciences Academic Unit, Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK; University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK.
Douglas G AltmanCentre for Statistics in Medicine, Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology & Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Bryony EcclesCancer Sciences Academic Unit, Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Sue GertySouthampton Clinical Trials Unit, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Lorraine T DurcanSouthampton Clinical Trials Unit, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Louise JonesTumour Biology Department, Institute of Cancer, Barts and The London School of Medicine & Dentistry, London, UK.
D Gareth EvansCentre for Genomic Medicine, Division of Evolution and Genomic Sciences, University of Manchester MAHSC, St Mary's Hospital, Manchester, UK.
Alastair M ThompsonUniversity of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.
Paul PharoahCentre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Douglas F EastonCentre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Alison M DunningCentre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Andrew HanbyDepartment of Pathology, University of Leeds, Faculty of Medicine, Leeds, UK.
Sunil LakhaniDiscipline of Molecular & Cellular Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Queensland, The Royal Brisbane & Women's Hospital, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.
Ros EelesInstitute of Cancer Research, London, UK.
Fiona J GilbertDepartment of Radiology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Cambridge, UK.
Hisham HamedGuy's & St Thomas' Hospital, London, UK.
Shirley HodgsonSt George's Hospital, University of London, London, UK.
Peter SimmondsUniversity Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK.
Louise StantonSouthampton Clinical Trials Unit, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Diana M EcclesCancer Sciences Academic Unit, Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK; University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK. Electronic address: d.m.eccles@soton.ac.uk.
University of Southampton · GBUniversity of Cambridge · GBUniversity Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust · GBInstitute of Cancer Research · GBManchester Academic Health Science Centre · GBNuffield Orthopaedic Centre · GBSt Thomas' Hospital · GBThe University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center · USUniversity of Leeds · GBUniversity of London · GBUniversity of Queensland · AU

Funding

Breast Cancer Now 2005NOV53Cancer Research UK 10118Cancer Research UK 10119Cancer Research UK 15956Cancer Research UK 16561Cancer Research UK 16565Cancer Research UK 16895Cancer Research UK 17528Cancer Research UK 19187Cancer Research UK 25352Cancer Research UK 26884Cancer Research UK A11699Cancer Research UK A19187Cancer Research UK C1275/A7572Cancer Research UK C22524
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRetrospective studies provide conflicting interpretations of the effect of inherited genetic factors on the prognosis of patients with breast cancer. The primary aim of this study was to determine the effect of a germline BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation on breast cancer outcomes in patients with young-onset breast cancer.

methodsWe did a prospective cohort study of female patients recruited from 127 hospitals in the UK aged 40 years or younger at first diagnosis (by histological confirmation) of invasive breast cancer. Patients with a previous invasive malignancy (except non-melanomatous skin cancer) were excluded. Patients were identified within 12 months of initial diagnosis. BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations were identified using blood DNA collected at recruitment. Clinicopathological data, and data regarding treatment and long-term outcomes, including date and site of disease recurrence, were collected from routine medical records at 6 months, 12 months, and then annually until death or loss to follow-up. The primary outcome was overall survival for all BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers (BRCA-positive) versus all non-carriers (BRCA-negative) at 2 years, 5 years, and 10 years after diagnosis. A prespecified subgroup analysis of overall survival was done in patients with triple-negative breast cancer. Recruitment was completed in 2008, and long-term follow-up is continuing.

findingsBetween Jan 24, 2000, and Jan 24, 2008, we recruited 2733 women. Genotyping detected a pathogenic BRCA mutation in 338 (12%) patients (201 with BRCA1, 137 with BRCA2). After a median follow-up of 8·2 years (IQR 6·0-9·9), 651 (96%) of 678 deaths were due to breast cancer. There was no significant difference in overall survival between BRCA-positive and BRCA-negative patients in multivariable analyses at any timepoint (at 2 years: 97·0% [95% CI 94·5-98·4] vs 96·6% [95·8-97·3]; at 5 years: 83·8% [79·3-87·5] vs 85·0% [83·5-86·4]; at 10 years: 73·4% [67·4-78·5] vs 70·1% [67·7-72·3]; hazard ratio [HR] 0·96 [95% CI 0·76-1·22]; p=0·76). Of 558 patients with triple-negative breast cancer, BRCA mutation carriers had better overall survival than non-carriers at 2 years (95% [95% CI 89-97] vs 91% [88-94]; HR 0·59 [95% CI 0·35-0·99]; p=0·047) but not 5 years (81% [73-87] vs 74% [70-78]; HR 1·13 [0·70-1·84]; p=0·62) or 10 years (72% [62-80] vs 69% [63-74]; HR 2·12 [0·82-5·49]; p= 0·12).

interpretationPatients with young-onset breast cancer who carry a BRCA mutation have similar survival as non-carriers. However, BRCA mutation carriers with triple-negative breast cancer might have a survival advantage during the first few years after diagnosis compared with non-carriers. Decisions about timing of additional surgery aimed at reducing future second primary-cancer risks should take into account patient prognosis associated with the first malignancy and patient preferences.

fundingCancer Research UK, the UK National Cancer Research Network, the Wessex Cancer Trust, Breast Cancer Now, and the PPP Healthcare Medical Trust Grant.

Indexed as

Genes, BRCA1Genes, BRCA2AdultAge FactorsBreast NeoplasmsCohort StudiesCombined Modality TherapyDisease-Free SurvivalFemaleGenetic Predisposition to DiseaseGerm-Line MutationHumansMultivariate AnalysisPatient Outcome AssessmentPrognosisProportional Hazards Models

Identifiers

PMID29337092
PMCPMC5805863
OpenAlexW2782723462

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.