ReviewCancers2022
Controversies and Opportunities in the Clinical Daily Use of the 21-Gene Assay for Prognostication and Prediction of Chemotherapy Benefit in HR+/HER2- Early Breast Cancer.
Review in Cancers, 2022. 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.
- Development and validation of an online prognostic risk stratification tool to assist decisions on perioperative chemotherapy for men with luminal early breast cancer.Breast cancer research : BCR · 2026Article
- Molecular analysis of tumor recurrence using established cancer stem cell-line and drug discovery.International journal of clinical oncology · 2026Review
- Oncotype DX Recurrence Score Predicts Survival in Invasive Micropapillary Breast Carcinoma: A National Cancer Database Analysis.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2025Article
- Ovarian Suppression: Early Menopause and Late Effects.Current treatment options in oncology · 2024Review
- Article
- Unveiling the HER2-low phenomenon: exploring immunohistochemistry and gene expression to characterise HR-positive HER2-negative early breast cancer.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Several multigene assays have been developed to help clinicians in defining adjuvant treatment for patients with hormone-receptor-positive (HR+), human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 (HER2)-negative early breast cancer. Despite the 21-gene assay having been available for decades, it has only recently been included in the healthcare systems of several countries. Clinical optimisation of the test remains of critical interest to achieve a greater impact of genomic information in HR+/HER2- early breast cancer. Although current guidelines recommend the use of the 21-gene assay in early breast cancer at intermediate risk of relapse, the implication of the Recurrence Score (RS) in some grey areas still remains uncertain. Our aim is to critically discuss the role of RS in peculiar circumstances. In particular, we focus on the complex integration of genomic data with clinicopathological factors; the potential clinical impact of RS in node-positive premenopausal women and in the neoadjuvant setting; the significance of RS in special histologies and in male patients; and the management and time-optimisation of test ordering. In the absence of robust evidence in these areas, we provide perspectives for improving the use of the 21-gene assay in the decision-making process and guide adjuvant treatment decisions even in challenging cases.
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.