ReviewJournal of mammary gland biology and neoplasia2022
Ductal Carcinoma in Situ: Molecular Changes Accompanying Disease Progression.
Review in Journal of mammary gland biology and neoplasia, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 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
22 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- SemanticST: A Scalable Multi-Contextual Graph Learning Framework for Uncovering Spatial Niches and Robust Multi-Sample Integration in Spatial Transcriptomics.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026Article
- Circulating Thioredoxin 1 as an Adjunct to Mammography for Breast Cancer Detection: A Multicenter Clinical Validation Study.Cancers · 2026Article
- CNet-Cox for interpretable network biomarker discovery and survival risk scoring in precise breast cancer prognosis.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Article
- Margin of Error: The Emerging Role of Field Cancerization in Predicting Recurrence Risk of Ductal Carcinoma In Situ.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Tissue-resident memory T cells reshapeFrontiers in immunology · 2026Review
- Postoperative radiotherapy for ductal carcinoma in situ: survival prediction and clinical decision support using a nomogram-based approach.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Multimodal Imaging of Ductal Carcinoma In Situ: A Single-Center Study of 75 Cases.Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- HSF2 drives breast cancer progression by acting as a stage-specific switch between proliferation and invasion.Science advances · 2025Article
- Mechanisms of osteopontin-stabilized amorphous calcium phosphate calcification in benign and pre-malignant breast disease.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- DCIS Progression and the Tumor Microenvironment: Molecular Insights and Prognostic Challenges.Cancers · 2025Review
- Development of a breast cancer invasion score to predict tumor aggressiveness and prognosis via PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway analysis.Cell death discovery · 2025Article
- Review
- The Genomic and Biologic Landscapes of Breast Cancer and Racial Differences.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Review
- Shear-Wave Elastography Gradient Analysis of Newly Diagnosed Breast Tumours: A Critical Analysis.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Progression from ductal carcinoma in situ to invasive breast cancer: molecular features and clinical significance.Signal transduction and targeted therapy · 2024Review
- The value of chromosome instability detected by low-pass whole-genome sequencing in preoperative prediction of sentinel lymph node metastasis in breast cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Article
- High resolution mapping of the tumor microenvironment using integrated single-cell, spatial and in situ analysis.Nature communications · 2023Article
- Evaluating the use of vacuum-assisted excisions in the management of B3 breast lesions.The British journal of radiology · 2023Article
- Should low-risk DCIS lose the cancer label? An evidence review.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2023Review
- Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is a non-obligate precursor of invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC), whereby if left untreated, approximately 12% of patients develop invasive disease. The current standard of care is surgical removal of the lesion, to prevent potential progression, and radiotherapy to reduce risk of recurrence. There is substantial overtreatment of DCIS patients, considering not all DCIS lesions progress to invasive disease. Hence, there is a critical imperative to better predict which DCIS lesions are destined for poor outcome and which are not, allowing for tailored treatment. Active surveillance is currently being trialed as an alternative management practice, but this approach relies on accurately identifying cases that are at low risk of progression to invasive disease. Two DCIS-specific genomic profiling assays that attempt to distinguish low and high-risk patients have emerged, but imperfections in risk stratification coupled with a high price tag warrant the continued search for more robust and accessible prognostic biomarkers. This search has largely turned researchers toward the tumor microenvironment. Recent evidence suggests that a spectrum of cell types within the DCIS microenvironment are genetically and phenotypically altered compared to normal tissue and play critical roles in disease progression. Uncovering the molecular mechanisms contributing to DCIS progression has provided optimism for the search for well-validated prognostic biomarkers that can accurately predict the risk for a patient developing IDC. The discovery of such markers would modernize DCIS management and allow tailored treatment plans. This review will summarize the current literature regarding DCIS diagnosis, treatment, and pathology.
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.