ArticleJapanese journal of clinical oncology2019
A preliminary report of head-to-head comparison of 18-gene-based clinical-genomic model and oncotype DX 21-gene assay for predicting recurrence of early-stage breast cancer.
Article in Japanese journal of clinical oncology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Value of the 21-gene expression assay in predicting locoregional recurrence rates in estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2022Pooled it
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of gene-expression-based prognostic tests for patients with early-stage breast cancer in South Korea.Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E · 2025Article
- Navigating precision: the crucial role of next-generation sequencing recurrence risk assessment in tailoring adjuvant therapy for hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor Receptor2-negative early breast cancer.Cancer biology & therapy · 2024Review
- Prognostic Comparison between Oncotype DXDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Disparities in Access to Systemic Treatment for Breast Cancer in Thailand and Major Asian Territories.Journal of breast cancer · 2022Article
- Cost-Effectiveness Analysis from a Societal Perspective of Recurrence Index for Distant Recurrence (RecurIndex) in Women with Hormone Receptor-Positive and HER2-Negative Early-Stage Breast Cancer.Cancer management and research · 2022Article
- Using Breast Cancer Gene Expression Signatures in Clinical Practice: Unsolved Issues, Ongoing Trials and Future Perspectives.Cancers · 2021Review
- The beneficial role of Asian-based RecurIndex test in the prognostic prediction in Chinese male breast cancer patients.Scientific reports · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe information of Oncotype DX applied in Asian breast cancer patients is limited. A recurrence index for distant recurrence (RI-DR) has been developed for early-stage breast cancer (EBC) from tumor samples in Chinese patients. In this study, we compared the prognostic performance of the Oncotype DX (ODx) recurrence score (RS) with the RI-DR for any recurrence risk type. MATERIALS AND
methodsOne hundred thirty-eight (138) patients with hormone receptor-positive and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative EBC who were previously tested with ODx were included for testing with the RI-DR. The cutoff score to partition the low- and high-risk patients was 26 for RS and 36 for RI-DR. The primary endpoint was recurrence-free survival (RFS).
resultsThe concordance between the RI-DR and RS was 83% in N0 patients and 81% in node-positive patients when the RS score cutoff was set at 26. With a median follow-up interval of 36.8 months, the 4-year RFS for the high- and low-risk groups categorized by the RS were 61.9% and 95.0%, respectively (hazard ratio: 10.6, 95.0% confidence interval [CI]: 1.8-62.9). The 4-year RFS in the high- and low-risk groups categorized by the RI-DR were 72.6% and 98.5%, respectively (hazard ratio: 18.9, 95% CI: 1.8-138.8).
conclusionThis paper illustrated the performance of RI-DR and ODx RS in breast cancer women in Taiwan. There was high concordance between the RI-DR and RS. The RI-DR is not inferior to the RS in predicting RFS in EBC patients. This study will fill the gap between the current and best practice in Chinese patients.
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.