Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29772837›Full record

ArticleGenes2018

Conventional Pathology Versus Gene Signatures for Assessing Luminal A and B Type Breast Cancers: Results of a Prospective Cohort Study.

Julia E C van Steenhoven, Anne Kuijer, Paul J van Diest, Joost M van Gorp, Marieke Straver, Sjoerd G Elias, Jelle Wesseling, Emiel Rutgers, Johanna N H Timmer-Bonte, Peter Nieboer and 5 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Genes, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

15 authors.

Julia E C van SteenhovenDepartment of Surgery, Diakonessenhuis Utrecht, 3582 KE Utrecht, The Netherlands. jvsteenhoven@diakhuis.nl.
Anne KuijerDepartment of Surgery, Diakonessenhuis Utrecht, 3582 KE Utrecht, The Netherlands. akuijer@diakhuis.nl.
Paul J van DiestDepartment of Pathology, University Medical Center Utrecht, 3584 CX Utrecht, The Netherlands. P.J.vanDiest@umcutrecht.nl.
Joost M van GorpDepartment of Pathology, Diakonessenhuis Utrecht, 3582 KE Utrecht, The Netherlands. jvgorp@diakhuis.nl.
Marieke StraverDepartment of Surgery, Haaglanden Medical Center, 2512 VA The Hague, The Netherlands. mstraver@hotmail.com.
Sjoerd G EliasDepartment of Epidemiology, Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, 3584 CG Utrecht, The Netherlands. s.elias@umcutrecht.nl.
Jelle WesselingDepartment of Pathology, Netherlands Cancer Institute-Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, 1066 CX Amsterdam, The Netherlands. jwesseling@nki.nl.
Emiel RutgersDepartment of Surgery, Netherlands Cancer Institute-Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, 1066 CX Amsterdam, The Netherlands. erutgers@nki.nl.
Johanna N H Timmer-BonteDepartment of Medical Oncology, Alexander-Monro Hospital, 3723 MB Bilthoven, The Netherlands. anja.timmer-bonte@radboudumc.nl.
Peter NieboerDepartment of Medical Oncology, Wilhelmina Hospital Assen, 9401 RK Assen, The Netherlands. peter.nieboer@wza.nl.
Tineke J SmildeDepartment of Medical Oncology, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, 5223 GZ 's-Hertogenbosch, The Netherlands. T.smilde@jbz.nl.ORCID 0000-0002-4196-3765
Alex ImholzDepartment of Medical Oncology, Deventer Hospital, 7416 SE Deventer, The Netherlands. A.imholz@dz.nl.
Charlotte F J M BlankenDepartment of Surgery, Rijnstate Hospital, 6815 AD Arnhem, The Netherlands. cblankenpeeters@gmail.com.
Sabine SieslingDepartment of Research, Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organization, 3511 DT Utrecht, The Netherlands. s.siesling@iknl.nl.
Thijs van DalenDepartment of Surgery, Diakonessenhuis Utrecht, 3582 KE Utrecht, The Netherlands. tvdalen@diakhuis.nl.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In this study, in estrogen receptor positive (ER+) early stage breast cancer patients who were considered candidates for 70-gene signature (70-GS, "MammaPrint") use, we compared molecular subtyping (MS) based on the previously validated 80-gene signature (80-GS, "BluePrint") versus surrogate pathological subtyping (PS). Between 1 January 2013 and 31 December 2015, 595 clinical intermediate risk ER+ early stage breast cancer patients were enrolled. Hormone receptor (HR) and HER2 receptor status were determined by conventional pathology using immunohistochemistry (IHC) and fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH). Ki67 was assessed in a subset of patients. The overall concordance between PS and MS for luminal type cancers (A and B together) was 98%. The concordance between PS and MS for luminal A and luminal B type cancers based on the Bloom Richardson histological grade (BR) (

Indexed as

70-gene signature80-gene signaturebreast cancerKi67local pathologymolecular subtyping

Identifiers

PMID29772837
PMCPMC5977201

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.