ArticleCancer management and research2022
Clinical Characteristics and Survival Outcomes of Infiltrating Lobular Carcinoma: A Retrospective Study of 365 Cases in China.
Article in Cancer management and research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Spatial transcriptomics reveals tumor microenvironment-driven subtypes of invasive lobular carcinoma.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026Article
- Lobular breast cancer and prognosis: what should we tell patients?Frontiers in oncology · 2026Review
- Invasive Lobular Carcinoma Has Higher Immune Response Than Invasive Ductal Carcinoma in Estrogen Receptor-Positive/Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2-Negative Breast Cancers.World journal of oncology · 2025Article
- Retrospective insights: clinical characteristics and survival in 403 ILC cases from China.BMC cancer · 2025Article
- Case report: Cutaneous metastases as a first manifestation from breast cancer with concurrent gastric metastases.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2024Article
- Histologic heterogeneity predicts patient prognosis of HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer: A retrospective study based on SEER database.Cancer medicine · 2023Article
- Treatment and outcome in metastatic lobular breast cancer in the prospective German research platform OPAL.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2023Article
- Article
- Improving Invasive Breast Cancer Care Using Machine Learning Technology.Journal of biomedical research & environmental sciences · 2022Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe objective of this study was to compare the demographic characteristics, clinicopathological factors and survival outcomes between infiltrating lobular carcinoma (ILC) and infiltrating ductal carcinoma (IDC) using our single-center database.
methodsSeventeen thousand two hundred and three breast cancer patients were treated at Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center (FUSCC) from January 2000 to December 2017. We identified 365 cases with ILC and 16,838 cases with IDC. The Pearson chi-square test was used to compare tumor characteristics, and the Kaplan-Meier methods were used to perform the survival analysis.
resultsILC had some distinctive characteristics from IDC such as older age (ranged from 61 to 80: ILC 26.8% vs IDC 19.9%, P < 0.001; over 80: ILC 1.6% vs IDC 0.8%, P < 0.001), larger tumor size (ranged from 2 to 5: ILC 45.2% vs IDC 37.1%, P = 0.011), much more hormone receptor expression (ILC 92.9% vs IDC 73.0%, P < 0.001), extremely less HER-2 expression (ILC 7.1% vs IDC 25.9%, P < 0.001). The overall survival and disease-free survival of ILC were worse than IDC (5-year OS, ILC 93.6% vs IDC 94.5%, P < 0.001; 5-year DFS, ILC 88.5% vs IDC 91.6%, P = 0.008). It was worth noting that the ILC patients had a worse overall survival than IDC patients after our propensity score matching study (P = 0.037). The univariate analysis concluded that positive HR (hormone receptor), high expression of Ki-67 and higher pathologic tumor stage were poor prognostic markers of ILC. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that tumor stage was a poor prognostic marker after adjustment for the effects of the above three factors. The most common primary site of metastasis was bone, but the proportion in the ILC group was much higher than that in the IDC group (56.25% vs 36.40%, P = 0.003).
conclusionCompared with IDC, ILC survived worse and was more prone to bone metastasis. Therefore, a comprehensive understanding of ILC and specific treatments are needed for further research.
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.