ArticleBMC cancer2020
Effect of neoadjuvant therapy on breast cancer biomarker profile.
Article in BMC cancer, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- Molecular shifts in breast cancer following neoadjuvant chemotherapy: a prospective study and review of literature.Future oncology (London, England) · 2025Review
- Personalized multifactorial risk assessment in neoadjuvant-treated breast carcinoma.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2025Article
- HER2 and hormone receptor conversion after neoadjuvant therapy for breast cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- Impact of Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy (NAC) on Biomarker Expression in Breast Cancer.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2024Article
- Effect of HER2-low expression on neoadjuvant efficacy in operable breast cancer.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2024Article
- Comprehensive evaluation of the relationship between biomarker profiles and neoadjuvant chemotherapy outcomes for breast cancer patients.Diagnostic pathology · 2024Article
- Multiplex electrochemical sensing platforms for the detection of breast cancer biomarkers.Frontiers in medical technology · 2024Review
- Clinical implications of receptor conversions in breast cancer patients who have undergone neoadjuvant chemotherapy.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2023Article
- Impact of residual disease biomarkers on the prognosis of HER2-positive breast cancer following neoadjuvant therapy.Cancer medicine · 2023Article
- Biomarker Alteration after Neoadjuvant Endocrine Therapy or Chemotherapy in Estrogen Receptor-Positive Breast Cancer.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Pathology after neoadjuvant treatment - How to assess residual disease.Breast (Edinburgh, Scotland) · 2022Article
- Immune Lymphocyte Infiltrate and its Prognostic Value in Triple-Negative Breast Cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Review
- Biomarkers Changes after Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Breast Cancer: A Seven-Year Single Institution Experience.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Systematic analysis of the expression and prognosis relevance of FBXO family reveals the significance of FBXO1 in human breast cancer.Cancer cell international · 2021Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundBreast cancer clinical management requires the assessment of hormone receptors (estrogen (ER) and progesterone receptor (PR)), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) and cellular proliferation index Ki67, by immunohistochemistry (IHC), in order to choose and guide therapy according to tumor biology. Many studies have reported contradictory results regarding changes in the biomarker profile after neoadjuvant therapy (NAT). Given its clinical implications for the disease management, we aimed to analyze changes in ER, PR, HER2, and Ki67 expression in paired core-needle biopsies and surgical samples in breast cancer patients that had either been treated or not with NAT.
methodsWe included 139 patients with confirmed diagnosis of invasive ductal breast carcinoma from the Colombian National Cancer Institute. Variation in biomarker profile were assessed according to NAT administration (NAT and no-NAT treated cases) and NAT scheme (hormonal, cytotoxic, cytotoxic + trastuzumab, combined). Chi-squared and Wilcoxon signed-rank test were used to identify changes in biomarker status and percentage expression, respectively, in the corresponding groups.
resultsWe did not find any significant variations in biomarker status or expression values in the no-NAT group. In cases previously treated with NAT, we did find a statistically significant decrease in Ki67 (p < 0.001) and PR (p = 0.02605) expression. When changes were evaluated according to NAT scheme, we found a significant decrease in both Ki67 status (p = 0.02977) and its expression values (p < 0.001) in cases that received the cytotoxic treatment.
conclusionsOur results suggest that PR and Ki67 expression can be altered by NAT administration, whereas cases not previously treated with NAT do not present IHC biomarker profile variations. The re-evaluation of these two biomarkers after NAT could provide valuable information regarding treatment response and prognosis for breast cancer patients.
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.