Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32586354›Full record

ArticleBreast cancer research : BCR2020

Patient treatment and outcome after breast cancer orbital and periorbital metastases: a comprehensive case series including analysis of lobular versus ductal tumor histology.

Martin Blohmer, Li Zhu, Jennifer M Atkinson, Sushil Beriwal, Joshua L Rodríguez-López, Margaret Rosenzweig, Adam M Brufsky, George Tseng, Peter C Lucas, Adrian V Lee and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Breast cancer research : BCR, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 18% 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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Results of a worldwide survey on the currently used histopathological diagnostic criteria for invasive lobular breast cancer.Modern pathology : an official journal of the United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology, Inc · 2022
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

12 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Martin BlohmerDepartment of Pharmacology & Chemical Biology, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Li ZhuDepartment of Biostatistics, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Jennifer M AtkinsonDepartment of Pharmacology & Chemical Biology, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Sushil BeriwalUniversity of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Department of Radiation Oncology, UPMC Hillman Cancer Center, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Joshua L Rodríguez-LópezUniversity of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Department of Radiation Oncology, UPMC Hillman Cancer Center, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Margaret RosenzweigWomen's Cancer Research Center, UPMC Hillman Cancer Center, Magee Women's Research Institute, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Adam M BrufskyUniversity of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology/Oncology, UPMC Hillman Cancer Center, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
George TsengWomen's Cancer Research Center, UPMC Hillman Cancer Center, Magee Women's Research Institute, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Peter C LucasWomen's Cancer Research Center, UPMC Hillman Cancer Center, Magee Women's Research Institute, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Adrian V LeeDepartment of Pharmacology & Chemical Biology, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Steffi OesterreichDepartment of Pharmacology & Chemical Biology, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Rachel C JankowitzUniversity of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology/Oncology, UPMC Hillman Cancer Center, Pittsburgh, PA, USA. Rachel.Jankowitz@Pennmedicine.upenn.edu.
UPMC Hillman Cancer Center · USCancer Research Center · USUniversity of Pittsburgh · USCharité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin · DE

Funding

VECTOR CORE FACILITYP30CA047904 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI Jessie Nedrow · 1988 to 2026
$158.0M
Advanced Development of TIES-Enhancing Access to Tissue for Cancer ResearchU24CA180921 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI BECICH, MICHAEL JOHN · 2013 to 2017
$3.3M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA047904NCI NIH HHS U24 CA180921Susan G. Komen CCR14300865Susan G. Komen SAC150021Susan G. Komen SAC160073
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBreast cancer is the most common malignancy to spread to the orbit and periorbit, and the invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC) histologic subtype of breast cancer has been reported to form these ophthalmic metastases (OM) more frequently than invasive ductal carcinomas (IDC). We herein report our single academic institution experience with breast cancer OM with respect to anatomical presentation, histology (lobular vs. ductal), treatment, and survival.

methodsWe employed the natural language processing platform, TIES (Text Information Extraction System), to search 2.3 million de-identified patient pathology and radiology records at our institution in order to identify patients with OM secondary to breast cancer. We then compared the resultant cohort, the "OM cohort," to two other representative metastatic breast cancer patient (MBC) databases from our institution. Histological analysis of selected patients was performed.

resultsOur TIES search and manual refinement ultimately identified 28 patients who were diagnosed with breast cancer between 1995 and 2016 that subsequently developed OM. Median age at diagnosis was 54 (range 28-77) years of age. ER, PR, and HER2 status from the 28 patients with OM did not differ from other patients with MBC from our institution. The relative proportion of patients with ILC was significantly higher in the OM cohort (32.1%) than in other MBC patients in our institution (11.3%, p = 0.007). Median time to first OM in the OM cohort was 46.7 months, and OM were the second most frequent first metastases after bony metastases. After diagnosis of the first distant metastasis of any kind, median survival of patients with ILC (21.4 months) was significantly shorter than that of patients with IDC (55.3 months, p = 0.03). Nine patients developed bilateral OM. We observed a significant co-occurrence of OM and central nervous system metastases (p = 0.0053). The histological analysis revealed an interesting case in which the primary tumor was of a mixed ILC/IDC subtype, while only ILC was present in the OM.

conclusionsOM from breast cancer are illustrative of the difference in metastatic behavior of ILC versus IDC and should be considered when treating patients with ILC, especially in those with complaints of visual acuity changes.

Indexed as

AdultAgedBreast NeoplasmsCarcinoma, Ductal, BreastCarcinoma, LobularErb-b2 Receptor Tyrosine KinasesFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansLymphatic MetastasisMiddle AgedOrbital NeoplasmsPrognosisRadiotherapy, Intensity-ModulatedReceptors, EstrogenReceptors, ProgesteroneERBB2 protein, humanErb-b2 Receptor Tyrosine KinasesReceptors, EstrogenReceptors, ProgesteroneBreast cancerEyeInvasive lobular carcinomaMetastasisOphthalmology

Identifiers

PMID32586354
PMCPMC7318761
OpenAlexW3037403590

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.