Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31434940›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2019

Cross comparison and prognostic assessment of breast cancer multigene signatures in a large population-based contemporary clinical series.

Johan Vallon-Christersson, Jari Häkkinen, Cecilia Hegardt, Lao H Saal, Christer Larsson, Anna Ehinger, Henrik Lindman, Helena Olofsson, Tobias Sjöblom, Fredrik Wärnberg and 5 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02306096 (SCAN-B), which is not on this map. Cited by 28 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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.

NCT02306096 recruitingnot on this map

SCAN-B: The Sweden Cancerome Analysis Network - Breast Initiative

TypeobservationalSponsorLund UniversityRan2010 to 2031Enrolled20,000ConditionsBreast Neoplasms
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

28 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Observational
  11. Article
  12. Prognostic significance of pretreatmentBreast cancer research and treatment · 2023
    Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Molecular Research and Treatment of Breast Cancer.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  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

15 authors.

Johan Vallon-ChristerssonDivision of Oncology and Pathology, Department of Clinical Sciences Lund, Lund University, Medicon Village, SE 22381, Lund, Sweden.
Jari HäkkinenDivision of Oncology and Pathology, Department of Clinical Sciences Lund, Lund University, Medicon Village, SE 22381, Lund, Sweden.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8466-9179
Cecilia HegardtDivision of Oncology and Pathology, Department of Clinical Sciences Lund, Lund University, Medicon Village, SE 22381, Lund, Sweden.
Lao H SaalDivision of Oncology and Pathology, Department of Clinical Sciences Lund, Lund University, Medicon Village, SE 22381, Lund, Sweden.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0815-1896
Christer LarssonDivision of Translational Cancer Research, Department of Laboratory Medicine, Lund University, SE 22381, Lund, Sweden.
Anna EhingerDivision of Oncology and Pathology, Department of Clinical Sciences Lund, Lund University, Medicon Village, SE 22381, Lund, Sweden.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9225-7396
Henrik LindmanDepartment of Immunology, Genetics and Pathology, Uppsala University, SE 75185, Uppsala, Sweden.
Helena OlofssonDepartment of Immunology, Genetics and Pathology, Uppsala University, SE 75185, Uppsala, Sweden.
Tobias SjöblomDepartment of Immunology, Genetics and Pathology, Uppsala University, SE 75185, Uppsala, Sweden.
Fredrik WärnbergDepartment of Surgical Sciences, Uppsala University, SE 75185, Uppsala, Sweden.
Lisa RydenDivision of Surgery, Department of Clinical Sciences, Lund University, SE 22185, Lund, Sweden.
Niklas LomanDivision of Oncology and Pathology, Department of Clinical Sciences Lund, Lund University, Medicon Village, SE 22381, Lund, Sweden.
Martin MalmbergDivision of Oncology and Pathology, Department of Clinical Sciences Lund, Lund University, Medicon Village, SE 22381, Lund, Sweden.
Åke BorgDivision of Oncology and Pathology, Department of Clinical Sciences Lund, Lund University, Medicon Village, SE 22381, Lund, Sweden.
Johan StaafDivision of Oncology and Pathology, Department of Clinical Sciences Lund, Lund University, Medicon Village, SE 22381, Lund, Sweden. johan.staaf@med.lu.se.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5254-5115

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Multigene expression signatures provide a molecular subdivision of early breast cancer associated with patient outcome. A gap remains in the validation of such signatures in clinical treatment groups of patients within population-based cohorts of unselected primary breast cancer representing contemporary disease stages and current treatments. A cohort of 3520 resectable breast cancers with RNA sequencing data included in the population-based SCAN-B initiative (ClinicalTrials.gov ID NCT02306096) were selected from a healthcare background population of 8587 patients diagnosed within the years 2010-2015. RNA profiles were classified according to 19 reported gene signatures including both gene expression subtypes (e.g. PAM50, IC10, CIT) and risk predictors (e.g. Oncotype DX, 70-gene, ROR). Classifications were analyzed in nine adjuvant clinical assessment groups: TNBC-ACT (adjuvant chemotherapy, n = 239), TNBC-untreated (n = 82), HER2+/ER- with anti-HER2+ ACT treatment (n = 110), HER2+/ER+ with anti-HER2 + ACT + endocrine treatment (n = 239), ER+/HER2-/LN- with endocrine treatment (n = 1113), ER+/HER2-/LN- with endocrine + ACT treatment (n = 243), ER+/HER2-/LN+ with endocrine treatment (n = 423), ER+/HER2-/LN+ with endocrine + ACT treatment (n = 433), and ER+/HER2-/LN- untreated (n = 200). Gene signature classification (e.g., proportion low-, high-risk) was generally well aligned with stratification based on current immunohistochemistry-based clinical practice. Most signatures did not provide any further risk stratification in TNBC and HER2+/ER- disease. Risk classifier agreement (low-, medium/intermediate-, high-risk groups) in ER+ assessment groups was on average 50-60% with occasional pair-wise comparisons having <30% agreement. Disregarding the intermediate-risk groups, the exact agreement between low- and high-risk groups was on average ~80-95%, for risk prediction signatures across all assessment groups. Outcome analyses were restricted to assessment groups of TNBC-ACT and endocrine treated ER+/HER2-/LN- and ER+/HER2-/LN+ cases. For ER+/HER2- disease, gene signatures appear to contribute additional prognostic value even at a relatively short follow-up time. Less apparent prognostic value was observed in the other groups for the tested signatures. The current study supports the usage of gene expression signatures in specific clinical treatment groups within population-based breast cancer. It also stresses the need of further development to reach higher consensus in individual patient classifications, especially for intermediate-risk patients, and the targeting of patients where current gene signatures and prognostic variables provide little support in clinical decision-making.

Indexed as

TranscriptomeAntineoplastic Agents, HormonalChemotherapy, AdjuvantDatabases, GeneticErb-b2 Receptor Tyrosine KinasesFemaleFollow-Up StudiesGene Expression Regulation, NeoplasticHumansKaplan-Meier EstimatePrognosisReceptors, EstrogenRiskTriple Negative Breast NeoplasmsAntineoplastic Agents, HormonalErb-b2 Receptor Tyrosine KinasesReceptors, Estrogen

Identifiers

PMID31434940
PMCPMC6704148

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.