ReviewHistopathology2023
Next-generation sequencing in breast pathology: real impact on routine practice over a decade since its introduction.
Review in Histopathology, 2023. 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.
- Racial differences in biomarkers, treatment, and outcomes in HR+/HER2- metastatic breast cancer in the United States.NPJ breast cancer · 2026Article
- Next-generation sequencing in breast cancer: current clinical applications and future directions.Annals of medicine · 2025Review
- Worse survival despite indolent features for triple-negative invasive lobular carcinoma: a Swedish nationwide registry-based study.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2025Article
- Retrospective comparison between breast cancer tissue- and blood-based next-generation sequencing results in detection of PIK3CA, AKT1, and PTEN alterations.Breast cancer research : BCR · 2025Article
- Harnessing Institutionally Developed Clinical Targeted Sequencing to Improve Patient Survival in Breast Cancer: A Seven-Year Experience.Cancer research and treatment · 2025Article
- The Genomic and Biologic Landscapes of Breast Cancer and Racial Differences.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The diagnosis, histomolecular classes of breast cancers (luminal A, luminal B, HER2-enriched, and basal-like), and accurate prediction of prognosis are commonly determined using morphological and phenotypical analyses in clinical practice worldwide. Therapeutic strategies are mostly based on the disease stage and molecular subclasses of breast cancer. Targeted therapies, such as anti-HER2s, poly-ADP ribose polymerase inhibitors or, to a lesser extent, phosphatidylinositol 3 kinase inhibitors, have substantially improved breast cancer patient prognosis over the past decades. Human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) overexpression is widely determined based on immunohistochemistry, while next-generation sequencing (NGS) is currently employed to assess the presence of molecular alterations, including breast cancer gene 1 (BRCA1) and 2 or phosphatidylinositol-4,5-bisphosphate 3-kinase catalytic subunit alpha (PIK3CA) mutations, which are targets of these new approved therapies. In addition, next-generation sequencing (NGS) can aid the pathologist in challenging situations, such as a diagnostic workup for a metastatic carcinoma in lymph nodes of unknown origin, differential diagnosis of spindle cell tumourtumor in the breast between metaplastic carcinoma, malignant PT and sarcoma, o, as well as determining relatedness between primary breast cancers and recurrences. NGS offers a powerful tool that enables the pathologist to combine morphological analyses together with molecular alterations in challenging diagnostic situations.
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.