Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35597840›Full record

ArticleBreast cancer research and treatment2022

Identification of tumor biomarkers for pathological complete response to neoadjuvant treatment in locally advanced breast cancer.

Prarthana Gopinath, Sridevi Veluswami, Gopal Gopisetty, Shirley Sundersingh, Swaminathan Rajaraman, Rajkumar Thangarajan

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Breast cancer research and treatment, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 56% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Prarthana GopinathDepartment of Molecular Oncology, Cancer Institute WIA, Chennai, 600036, Tamil Nadu, India.
Sridevi VeluswamiDepartment of Surgical Oncology, Cancer Institute WIA, Chennai, 600036, Tamil Nadu, India. sri04devi@yahoo.co.in.
Gopal GopisettyDepartment of Molecular Oncology, Cancer Institute WIA, Chennai, 600036, Tamil Nadu, India. ggopisetty@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7869-4343
Shirley SundersinghDepartment of Oncopatholology, Cancer Institute WIA, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India.
Swaminathan RajaramanDepartment of Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Cancer Registry, Cancer Institute WIA, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India.
Rajkumar ThangarajanDepartment of Molecular Oncology, Cancer Institute WIA, Chennai, 600036, Tamil Nadu, India.
Cancer Institute (WIA) · IN

Funding

Indian Council of Medical Research 5/3/8/37/ITR-F/2018-ITRScience and Engineering Research Board No.SERB/F/2369/2014-15
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTherapeutic response predictors like age, nodal status, and tumor grade and markers, like ER/PR, HER2, and Ki67, are not reliable in predicting the response to a specific form of chemotherapy. The current study aims to identify and validate reliable markers that can predict pathological complete response (pCR) in fluorouracil, epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide (FEC)-based neoadjuvant therapy with (NACT/RT) and without concurrent radiation (NACT). MATERIALS AND

methodsTandem mass tag (TMT) quantitative liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) was used to identify differentially expressed proteins from core needle breast biopsy between pCR (n = 4) and no-pCR (n = 4). Immunoblotting of shortlisted proteins with the tissue lysates confirmed the differential expression of the markers. Further, immunohistochemistry (IHC) was performed on formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded sections of treatment-naive core needle biopsies. In the NACT, 29 pCR and 130 no-pCR and in NACT/RT, 32 pCR and 71 no-pCR were used.

results733 and 807 proteins were identified in NACT and NACT/RT groups, respectively. Ten proteins were shortlisted for validation as potential pCR-predictive markers. THBS1, TNC, and DCN were significantly overexpressed in no-pCR in both the groups. In NACT, CPA3 was significantly upregulated in the no-pCR. In NACT/RT, HnRNPAB was significantly upregulated and HMGB1 significantly downregulated in the no-pCR. HMGB1 was the only marker to show prognostic significance.

conclusionQuantitative proteomics followed by IHC identified and validated potential biomarkers for predicting patient response to therapy. These markers can be used, following larger-scale validation, in combination with routine histological analysis providing vital indications of treatment response.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsHMGB1 ProteinAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsBiomarkers, TumorChromatography, LiquidErb-b2 Receptor Tyrosine KinasesFemaleHumansNeoadjuvant TherapyReceptors, EstrogenReceptors, ProgesteroneTandem Mass SpectrometryTreatment OutcomeBiomarkers, TumorErb-b2 Receptor Tyrosine KinasesHMGB1 ProteinReceptors, EstrogenReceptors, ProgesteroneDecorinHigh-mobility group box 1Locally advanced breast cancerPredictive markerTenascin-CThrombospondin-1

Identifiers

PMID35597840
OpenAlexW4281253238

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.