ArticleAnnals of surgical treatment and research2019
Identifying breast cancer patients who require a double-check of preoperative core needle biopsy and postoperative surgical specimens to determine the molecular subtype of their tumor.
Article in Annals of surgical treatment and research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Obesity-Associated Breast Cancer: Analysis of Risk Factors and Current Clinical Evaluation.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2024Review
- Concordance of breast cancer biomarker testing in core needle biopsy and surgical specimens: A single institution experience.Cancer medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeCore needle biopsy (CNB) is a widely used procedure for breast cancer diagnosis and analyzing results of immunohistochemistry (IHC). Several studies have shown concordance or discordance in IHC results between CNB and surgical specimens (SS). A double-check (CNB and SS) is inefficient and costly to perform a double-check on all patients. Therefore, it is important to determine which patients would benefit from a double-check.
methodsWe collected the medical records of patients who underwent breast cancer surgery at Pusan National University Yangsan Hospital between April 2009 and June 2018 (n = 620). Molecular subtypes were classified as follows by hormone receptors (HR) and human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 (HER2): HR+/HER2+, HR+/HER2-, HR-/HER2+, HR-/HER2-. Clinicopathological factors including age, obesity, histological grade, preoperative CEA, CA15-3, T stage, N stage, and menopausal status were assessed to determine whether they were associated with subtype change.
resultsIncreasing histological grade (P < 0.001; odds ratio [OR], 3.693; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.941-7.025), preoperative CEA ≥ 5 ng/mL (P =0.042; OR, 2.399; 95% CI, 1.009-5.707) and higher T stage (P = 0.015; OR, 2.241; 95% CI, 1.152-4.357) were significantly associated with subtype change. On multivariable analyses, subtype changes were more common in high-grade breast cancer (P < 0.001; OR, 1.077; 95% CI, 1.031-1.113) and CEA ≥ 5 (P = 0.032; OR, 2.658; 95% CI, 1.088-6.490).
conclusionPatients with moderate- to high-grade tumors or CEA ≥ 5 ng/mL are required a double-check to determine the molecular subtype of breast cancer.
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.