Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30083053›Full record

ArticleBiomarker insights2018

Development of a Novel Proteomic Risk-Classifier for Prognostication of Patients With Early-Stage Hormone Receptor-Positive Breast Cancer.

Charusheila Ramkumar, Ljubomir Buturovic, Sukriti Malpani, Arun Kumar Attuluri, Chetana Basavaraj, Chandra Prakash, Lekshmi Madhav, Dinesh Chandra Doval, Anurag Mehta, Manjiri M Bakre

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Biomarker insights, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 30% 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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 40 citations in OpenAlex.

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

10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Charusheila RamkumarOncoStem Diagnostics, Bangalore, India.
Ljubomir ButurovicClinical Persona, Inc., East Palo Alto, CA, USA.
Sukriti MalpaniOncoStem Diagnostics, Bangalore, India.
Arun Kumar AttuluriOncoStem Diagnostics, Bangalore, India.
Chetana BasavarajOncoStem Diagnostics, Bangalore, India.
Chandra PrakashOncoStem Diagnostics, Bangalore, India.
Lekshmi MadhavOncoStem Diagnostics, Bangalore, India.
Dinesh Chandra DovalChair Medical Oncology & Chief of Breast & Thoracic Services, Rajiv Gandhi Cancer Institute and Research Centre, New Delhi, India.
Anurag MehtaDirector Department of Laboratory & Transfusion Services and Director Research, Rajiv Gandhi Cancer Institute and Research Centre, New Delhi, India.
Manjiri M BakreOncoStem Diagnostics, Bangalore, India.
Rajiv Gandhi Cancer Institute and Research Centre · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Use of proteomic strategies to identify a risk classifier that estimates probability of distant recurrence in early-stage hormone receptor (HR)-positive breast cancer is relevant to physiological cellular function and therefore to intrinsic tumor biology. We used a 298-sample retrospective training set to develop an immunohistochemistry-based novel risk classifier called CanAssist-Breast (CAB) which combines 5 prognostically relevant biomarkers and 3 clinico-pathological parameters to arrive at probability of distant recurrence within 5 years from diagnosis. Five selected biomarkers, namely, CD44, ABCC4, ABCC11, N-cadherin, and pan-cadherin, were chosen based on their role in tumor metastasis. The chosen biomarkers represent the hallmarks of cancer and are distinct from other proliferation and gene expression-based prognostic signatures. The 3 clinico-pathological parameters integrated into the machine learning-based CAB algorithm are tumor size, tumor grade, and node status. These features are used to calculate a "CAB risk score" that classifies patients into low- or high-risk groups and predicts probability of distant recurrence in 5 years. Independent clinical validation of CAB in a retrospective study comprising 196 patients indicated that distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) was significantly different in the 2 risk groups. The difference in DMFS between the low- and high-risk categories was 19% in the validation cohort (

Indexed as

early breast cancerimmunohistochemistrymachine learningprognosisrecurrence risk classification

Identifiers

PMID30083053
PMCPMC6066801
OpenAlexW2885867072

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.