ArticlePloS one2022
Survival analysis in patients with invasive lobular cancer and invasive ductal cancer according to hormone receptor expression status in the Korean population.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Long-term outcomes and treatment response in early-stage invasive lobular carcinoma: insights from a nationwide population-based study.ESMO open · 2026Article
- Lobular breast cancer and prognosis: what should we tell patients?Frontiers in oncology · 2026Review
- Comprehensive characterization of invasive mammary carcinoma with lobular features: integrating morphology and E-cadherin immunohistochemistry patterns.Breast cancer (Tokyo, Japan) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWe compared the clinicopathological characteristics and survival outcomes of invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC) cases with those of invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC) cases in various hormone receptor expression subgroups.
methodsWe compared clinicopathological characteristics, overall survival (OS), and breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) between patients with IDC (n = 95,486) and ILC (n = 3,023). In addition, we analyzed the effects of different hormone receptor expression subgroups on survival.
resultsThe ILC group had more instances of advanced stage and hormonal receptor positivity than did the IDC group (p < 0.001), but the IDC group had higher histological grade and nuclear grade, as well as higher frequency of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 and Ki67 expression than did the ILC group (p < 0.001). The OS and BCSS were not significantly different between the IDC and ILC groups. The 5-year OS of the IDC group was 88.8%, while that of the ILC group was 90.6% (p = 0.113). The 5-year BCSS of the IDC group was 94.8%, while that of the ILC group was 95.0% (p = 0.552). When analyzing each hormone receptor expression subgroup, there were no significant differences in survival between the IDC and ILC groups. However, the estrogen receptor (ER) negative/progesterone receptor (PR) negative subgroup showed differences in survival between the IDC and ILC groups. Moreover, the hazard ratio of ILC in the ER negative/PR negative subgroup was 1.345 (95% confidence interval: 1.012-1.788; p = 0.041).
conclusionsHormone receptor expression should be considered when determining prognosis and treatment regimen for IDC and ILC. Researchers should further study the ER negative/PR negative population to identify treatment and prognostic models that will facilitate the development of individualized therapy for these patients, which is needed for good outcomes.
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.