ArticleHistology and histopathology2022
A comparative clinicopathological and survival analysis of synchronous bilateral breast cancers.
Article in Histology and histopathology, 2022. 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, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Bilateral Primary Breast Cancer: Current Evidence and Future Perspectives.Breast cancer (Dove Medical Press) · 2026Review
- Is Metastatic Staging Needed for All Patients with Synchronous Bilateral Breast Cancers?Cancers · 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
9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThe present study aimed to explore the clinicopathological characteristics, potential heterogeneity and prognostic factors in synchronous bilateral breast cancer (SBBC).
methodsWe performed a retrospective review and paired comparison of the clinicopathological characteristics of 114 patients with SBBC in the Peking Union Medical College Hospital from January 2008 to September 2019. The prognostic significance of triple negativity status and coexistence ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) with bilateral invasive ductal carcinomas of no special type (IDC-NST) was analyzed in SBBC.
resultsMost bilateral lesions on both sides were of IDC-NST, grade 2, luminal subtype, and stage I. Although most lesions were concordant between the left and right side, discordances were observed in histological type (25 cases, 21.9%), histological grade (31 cases, 27.2%), pTNM (61 cases, 53.5%), molecular subtypes (20 cases, 17.5%), and immunohistochemical staining of ER (18 cases, 15.8%), PR (26 cases, 22.8%), and HER2 (12 cases, 10.5%). Moreover, there was no significant difference in disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) between IDC-NST with coexisting DCIS on both sides and IDC-NST with coexisting DCIS on one side or pure IDC-NST. SBBC with triple negativity on both sides exhibited a significantly shorter DFS and OS when compared with triple negativity on one side or non-triple negativity on both sides (p<0.001), and remained an independent prognostic factor by multivariate analysis.
conclusionsA considerable proportion of discordance in clinicopathological characteristics is observed in SBBC, supporting the necessity of comprehensive pathological examination including immunohistochemical testing on both sides in clinical practice. Moreover, SBBC with triple negativity on both sides is a prognostic for poor survival.
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.