ArticleCancer2020
Propensity score analysis of the prognostic value of genomic assays for breast cancer in diverse populations using the National Cancer Data Base.
Article in Cancer, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
26 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 49 citations in OpenAlex.
- Tumour profiling tests to guide adjuvant chemotherapy decisions in lymph node-positive early breast cancer: a systematic review and economic evaluation.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2025Pooled it
- Gene expression profiling tests to guide adjuvant chemotherapy decisions in lymph node-positive early breast cancer: a systematic review.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2025Pooled it
- The Assessment of Race, the 21-Gene Recurrence Score, and Breast Cancer Outcomes at Kaiser Permanente.Cancers · 2026Article
- Prognostic consistency of oncotype DX® molecular assay across racial groups in early-stage hormone receptor-positive breast cancer.NPJ breast cancer · 2026Article
- Adjuvant Chemotherapy Use for Hormone Receptor-Positive, ERBB2-Negative Breast Cancer After RxPONDER Trial.JAMA network open · 2025Article
- Genetic Ancestry and 21-Gene Oncotype DX Breast Cancer Recurrence Scores.Annals of surgical oncology · 2025Article
- Article
- Molecular Mechanism of Breast Cancer and Predisposition of Mouse Mammary Tumor Virus Propagation Cycle.Current medicinal chemistry · 2025Review
- Investigating MRI-Associated Biological Aspects of Racial Disparities in Prostate Cancer for African American and White Men.Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI · 2025Article
- Differences in 21-Gene and PAM50 Recurrence Scores in Younger and Black Women With Breast Cancer.JCO precision oncology · 2024Article
- Development and validation of a clinical breast cancer tool for accurate prediction of recurrence.NPJ breast cancer · 2024Article
- Performance of a novel spectroscopy-based tool for adjuvant therapy decision-making in hormone receptor-positive breast cancer: a validation study.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2024Article
- Addressing Social Determinants in the Era of Precision Medicine in Breast Cancer: Is It Sufficient to Reduce Disparities?Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2024Article
- Article
- A nomogram based on inflammation and nutritional biomarkers for predicting the survival of breast cancer patients.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2024Article
- Race, Gene Expression Signatures, and Clinical Outcomes of Patients With High-Risk Early Breast Cancer.JAMA network open · 2023Article
- Nomogram prediction of the 70-gene signature (MammaPrint) binary and quartile categorized risk using medical history, imaging features and clinicopathological data among Chinese breast cancer patients.Journal of translational medicine · 2023Article
- Molecular profiling of a real-world breast cancer cohort with genetically inferred ancestries reveals actionable tumor biology differences between European ancestry and African ancestry patient populations.Breast cancer research : BCR · 2023Article
- The Landmark Series-Addressing Disparities in Breast Cancer Screening: New Recommendations for Black Women.Annals of surgical oncology · 2023Review
- Impact of time to distant recurrence on breast cancer-specific mortality in hormone receptor-positive breast cancer.Cancer causes & control : CCC · 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
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundGenomic assays such as Oncotype Dx (ODX) and MammaPrint are used for risk-adapted treatment decisions among patients with early breast cancer. However, to the authors' knowledge, concordance between genomic assays is modest. Using real-world data, the authors performed a comparative analysis of ODX and MammaPrint.
methodsA cohort of women diagnosed with early-stage, hormone receptor-positive breast cancer who received ODX or MammaPrint was established using the National Cancer Data Base (NCDB) for 2010 through 2016. Using the propensity score matching method, 2 groups of patients with similar clinical and demographic characteristics were defined: one group received ODX and the other received MammaPrint. The authors examined the association between use of the ODX or MammaPrint assays and overall survival using Cox models.
resultsOf the 451,693 eligible patients, approximately 45.3% received ODX and 1.8% received MammaPrint testing. The use of ODX increased from 36.1% in 2010 to 49.9% in 2016, whereas use of MammaPrint increased from 0.5% in 2010 to 3.3% in 2016. The authors matched 5042 patients who received ODX with 5042 patients who received MammaPrint. The 5-year risks of death for the MammaPrint low-risk group and the ODX low-risk group were 3.4% and 4.7%, respectively. The prognostic value of MammaPrint was similar to that of ODX; the C-index was 0.614 (95% confidence interval, 0.572-0.657) for MammaPrint and 0.581 (95% confidence interval, 0.530-0.631) for ODX. There was a difference in the performance of the ODX assay observed across racial and/or ethnic groups (P < .001), with a slightly better performance noted among white compared with African American and Hispanic individuals.
conclusionsBoth the ODX and MammaPrint tests are good at identifying low-risk individuals who could be spared chemotherapy. The suboptimal performance of ODX in ethnic minority individuals deserves further investigation.
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.