ReviewDiagnostic cytopathology2022
Cytological and molecular characterization of secretory breast carcinoma.
Review in Diagnostic cytopathology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Seven Shades of Triple Negativity: A Review Unveiling the Low-Grade Spectrum of Breast Cancer.Cancers · 2025Review
- Case Report: Metastasis to pleura and mediastinal lymph nodes from breast secretory carcinoma: 10 years follow-up.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- Rare Breast Cancers Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- NTRK fusion promotes tumor migration and invasion through epithelial-mesenchymal transition and closely interacts with ECM1 and NOVA1.BMC cancer · 2024Article
- Advancement of secretory breast carcinoma: a narrative review.Annals of translational medicine · 2022Review
- Cytological and molecular characterization of secretory breast carcinoma.Diagnostic cytopathology · 2022Review
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.
Funding
Abstract
Secretory breast carcinoma is a rare neoplasm, histologically well-characterized, and secondary to ETV6-NTRK3 gene fusion, whose cytological features are scarcely described in the literature. We report the case of a woman with a history of secretory breast carcinoma 8 years before, who presented a periareolar nodule. A recurrence was diagnosed by fine-needle aspiration based on the cytomorphological features and pan-TRK immunocytochemistry on the cell block, and the patient underwent a mastectomy. The histology and molecular studies performed on the surgical specimen (immunohistochemistry, FISH and NGS) confirmed the diagnosis. Cytological smears showed abundant epithelial cellularity, in groups and single cells. These cells showed moderate atypia, with abundant cytoplasm. We observed intracytoplasmic inclusions and extracellular metachromatic globules. Immunocytochemical and immunohistochemical studies showed a triple negative breast tumour. NTRK overexpression was demonstrated with immunocytochemistry against pan-TRK on the cell block, as well as with immunohistochemistry in the surgical specimen. NTRK3 rearrangement was proved by FISH. In the primary tumour and in the recurrence, we demonstrated ETV6-NTRK3 fusion by NGS. After conducting a literature review, we have found 26 articles describing the cytological features of secretory breast carcinoma in 33 patients. The smears were described as groups of epithelial cells with vacuolated cytoplasm, single signet ring cells and a globular extracellular secretion. In only two cases molecular confirmation of the diagnosis with ETV6-NTRK3 fusion was proven, although not in the cytological specimen, but in the subsequent biopsy. The distinct cytological features of secretory breast carcinoma can help in its diagnosis, thus guiding the molecular studies. This is the first reported case that proves TRK overexpression, as a fusion surrogate, in the cytological sample.
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.