Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32019280›Full record

Trial reportCancer research and treatment2020

Comparison of the Distribution Pattern of 21-Gene Recurrence Score between Mucinous Breast Cancer and Infiltrating Ductal Carcinoma in Chinese Population: A Retrospective Single-Center Study.

Jiayi Wu, Shuning Ding, Lin Lin, Xiaochun Fei, Caijin Lin, Lisa Andriani, Chihwan Goh, Jiahui Huang, Jin Hong, Weiqi Gao and 9 more

Open access · diamondAbstract readClinical TrialComparative Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Cancer research and treatment, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Mucinous carcinoma with micropapillary features is morphologically, clinically and genetically distinct from pure mucinous carcinoma of breast.Modern pathology : an official journal of the United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology, Inc · 2020
    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

19 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Jiayi WuComprehensive Breast Health Center, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Shuning DingComprehensive Breast Health Center, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Lin LinDepartment of Clinical Laboratory, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Xiaochun FeiDepartment of Pathology, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Caijin LinComprehensive Breast Health Center, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Lisa AndrianiComprehensive Breast Health Center, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Chihwan GohComprehensive Breast Health Center, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Jiahui HuangComprehensive Breast Health Center, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Jin HongComprehensive Breast Health Center, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Weiqi GaoComprehensive Breast Health Center, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Siji ZhuComprehensive Breast Health Center, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Hui WangComprehensive Breast Health Center, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Ou HuangComprehensive Breast Health Center, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Xiaosong ChenComprehensive Breast Health Center, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Jianrong HeComprehensive Breast Health Center, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Yafen LiComprehensive Breast Health Center, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Kunwei ShenComprehensive Breast Health Center, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Weiguo ChenComprehensive Breast Health Center, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Li ZhuComprehensive Breast Health Center, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Shanghai Jiao Tong University · CNRuijin Hospital · CN

Funding

Grant of Shanghai municipal commission of health and family planning 201840323National Natural Science Foundation of China 81572581National Natural Science Foundation of China 81772797Technology Innovation Act Plan of Shanghai Municipal Science and Technology Commission 14411950200Technology Innovation Act Plan of Shanghai Municipal Science and Technology Commission 14411950201Technology Innovation Act Plan of Shanghai Municipal Science and Technology Commission 16411966- 900
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThis retrospective study aimed to evaluate the distribution pattern and prognostic value of 21-gene recurrence score (RS) in Chinese patients with mucinous breast cancer (MC) and compared with infiltrating ductal carcinoma (IDC). MATERIALS AND

methodsPatients diagnosed with MC or IDC from January 2010 to January 2017 were retrospectively recruited. Reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction assay of 21 genes was conducted to calculate the RS. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to assess the association between RS and clinicopathological factors. Survival outcomes including disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were estimated by Kaplan-Meier method and compared by log-rank test.

resultsThe MC cohort included 128 patients and the IDC cohort included 707 patients. The proportions of patients with a low (RS < 18), intermediate (18-30), or high risk (RS > 30) were 32.0%, 48.4%, and 19.5% in MC cohort, and 26.9%, 46.8% and 26.3% in IDC cohort. The distribution of RS varied significantly according to different Ki-67 index and molecular subtype in both cohorts. Moreover, the receipt of chemotherapy was associated with RS in both cohorts. Among patients with MC, tumor stage was related to the DFS (p=0.040). No significant differences in DFS and OS were found among MC patients in different RS risk groups (OS, p=0.695; DFS, p=0.926).

conclusionRS was significantly related to Ki-67 index and molecular subtypes in MC patients, which is similar in IDC patients. However, RS was not able to predict DFS and OS in patients with MC.

Indexed as

TranscriptomeAdenocarcinoma, MucinousBiomarkers, TumorBreast NeoplasmsCarcinoma, Ductal, BreastChinaCombined Modality TherapyErb-b2 Receptor Tyrosine KinasesFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansMiddle AgedNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalPrognosisReceptors, EstrogenReceptors, ProgesteroneBiomarkers, TumorErb-b2 Receptor Tyrosine KinasesReceptors, EstrogenReceptors, ProgesteroneMucinous mammary malignancyMultigene assayPrognosis

Identifiers

PMID32019280
PMCPMC7373851
OpenAlexW3003657667

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.