ArticleTurk patoloji dergisi2020
The Clinicopathological Significance of Basal Markers in Early-Stage Invasive Carcinoma of No Special Type of the Breast.
Article in Turk patoloji dergisi, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveBasal markers [cytokeratin 5/6 (CK5/6) and epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)] are used in identifying the basal-like breast carcinoma subtype, which is associated with a poor prognosis. However, the clinicopathological significance in early-stage invasive carcinoma of no special type (IC, NST) has not been well established. MATERIAL AND
methodIn a five-year period, 133 female patients with early-stage IC, NST with a median follow-up time of 89 months were included. The immunohistochemistry-based molecular subtypes were identified according to ASCO/CAP guidelines in 2013. The cutoff values for basal positivity were determined as 10% for each marker.
resultsBasal positivity was recorded in 83.3% (5/6) of triple-negative breast cancers, 50% (2/4) of HER2-enriched, 18.6% (13/70) of luminal B, and 8.3% of luminal A (4/48) subtype. CK5/6 and EGFR positivity were significantly associated with ER negativity (p < 0.001). EGFR positive cases were significantly associated with PR negativity and HER2 positivity compared to negative cases. However, basal positivity was not associated with the patient outcome (p = 0.006 and p = 0.004, respectively).
conclusionBasal positive IC, NSTs were associated with hormone receptor negativity and HER2 overexpression; these patients would therefore be less likely to respond to hormonotherapy and more likely to benefit from anti-HER2 treatment as well as dual-kinase inhibitors. The lack of standardization of the definition of basal marker positivity may contribute to the conflicting results of prognostic studies. Hence, further studies focusing on developing a standard protocol for determining basal marker positivity are needed not only for IC, NST but also for other histological types 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.