Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33282730›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in oncology2020

Triple-Negative Breast Cancer Comparison With Canine Mammary Tumors From Light Microscopy to Molecular Pathology.

Asadoor Amirkhani Namagerdi, Danila d'Angelo, Francesca Ciani, Carmelina Antonella Iannuzzi, Francesco Napolitano, Luigi Avallone, Michelino De Laurentiis, Antonio Giordano

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in oncology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 32 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

8 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Asadoor Amirkhani NamagerdiDepartment of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Production, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy.
Danila d'AngeloDepartment of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Production, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy.
Francesca CianiDepartment of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Production, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy.
Carmelina Antonella IannuzziCell Biology and Biotherapy Unit, Istituto Nazionale Tumori- IRCCS- Fondazione G. Pascale, Naples, Italy.
Francesco NapolitanoDepartment of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Production, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy.
Luigi AvalloneDepartment of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Production, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy.
Michelino De LaurentiisBreast Oncology Division, Istituto Nazionale Tumori IRCCS Fondazione G. Pascale, Naples, Italy.
Antonio GiordanoCenter for Biotechnology, College of Science and Technology, Sbarro Institute for Cancer Research and Molecular Medicine, Temple University, Philadelphia, PA, United States.
University of Naples Federico II · ITIstituto Nazionale Tumori IRCCS "Fondazione G. Pascale" · ITTemple University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Many similar characteristics in human and dog cancers including, spontaneous development, clinical presentation, tumor heterogeneity, disease progression, and response to standard therapies have promoted the approval of this comparative model as an alternative to mice. Breast cancer represents the second most frequent neoplasm in humans after lung cancer. Triple-negative breast cancers (TNBC) constitute around 15% of all cases of breast cancer and do not express estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), and do not overexpress human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2). As a result, they do not benefit from hormonal or trastuzumab-based therapy. Patients with TNBC have worse overall survival than patients with non-TNBC. Lehmann and collaborators described six different molecular subtypes of TNBC which further demonstrated its transcriptional heterogeneity. This six TNBC subtype classification has therapeutic implications. Breast cancer is the second most frequent neoplasm in sexually intact female dogs after skin cancer. Canine mammary tumors are a naturally occurring heterogeneous group of cancers that have several features in common with human breast cancer (HBC). These similarities include etiology, signaling pathway activation, and histological classification. Molecularly CMTs are more like TNBCs, and therefore dogs are powerful spontaneous models of cancer to test new therapeutic approaches, particularly for human TNBCs. More malignant tumors of the breast are more often ER and PR negative in both humans and dogs. Promising breast cancer biomarkers in both humans and canines are cancer-associated stroma (CAS), circulating tumor cells and tumor DNA (ctDNA), exosomes and miRNAs, and metabolites.

Indexed as

canine mammary tumorsgenetics and epigeneticshormonal receptorstriple-negative breast cancerstumor biomarkers

Identifiers

PMID33282730
PMCPMC7689249
OpenAlexW3105340544

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.