ReviewOncology and therapy2020
The Potential Use of Tumour-Based Prognostic and Predictive Tools in Older Women with Primary Breast Cancer: A Narrative Review.
Review in Oncology and therapy, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Data-Driven SustainableACS biomaterials science & engineering · 2025Article
- Overexpression of Estrogen Receptor α in Mammary Glands of Aging Mice Is Associated with a Proliferative Risk Signature and Generation of Estrogen Receptor α-Positive Mammary Adenocarcinomas.The American journal of pathology · 2023Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A move is under way towards personalised cancer treatment, where tumour biology of an individual patient is examined to give unique predictive and prognostic information. This is extremely important in the setting of older women, who have treatment-specific goals which may differ from their younger counterparts, and may include conservation of quality of life rather than curative intent of treatment. One method employed to assist with this is the use of tumour-based prognostic and predictive tools. This article explores six of the most common tumour-based tools currently available on the market: MammaPrint, Oncotype DX, Mammostrat, Prosigna, EndoPredict, IHC4. The article discusses the creation and validation of these tools, their use and validation in older women, and future directions in the field. With the exception of Oncotype Dx, which has also been licensed for prediction of response from adjuvant chemotherapy, these tools have been licensed for use as prognostic tools only, mainly in the setting of adjuvant therapy following surgery. The evidence base for use in older women is strongest for Mammostrat and PAM50, although overall the evidence is much weaker than that in younger women. Where older women have been included in validation studies, this is often in small numbers, or the exact proportion of older women is unknown. In practice, all six of the tools are recommended to be utilised on surgical excision specimens, as well as in core needle biopsy (CNB) specimens in all of the tools except Mammostrat. This is extremely important in the setting of older women, of whom a large proportion do not undergo surgery. The suggested nature of the sample is formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded in all the tools except MammaPrint, which can also be performed on fresh-frozen samples. Future development of prognostic tools in older women with breast cancer should focus on treatment dilemmas specific to this population. This includes the decision of primary treatment between surgery or endocrine therapy and decisions regarding adjuvant therapy, in particular, chemotherapy.
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.