Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36807725›Full record

ArticleBreast cancer research and treatment2023

Treatment and outcome in metastatic lobular breast cancer in the prospective German research platform OPAL.

M Thill, M-O Zahn, A Welt, E Stickeler, A Nusch, T Fietz, J Rauh, N Wetzel, L Kruggel, M Jänicke and 5 more

Registry-linked trialFull text read
In one paragraph

Article in Breast cancer research and treatment, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03417115 (Treatment and Outcome of Patients With Breast Cancer), which is not on this map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT03417115 recruitingnot on this map

Treatment and Outcome of Patients With Breast Cancer: Clinical Research Platform for Real World Data

Typeobservational_patient_registrySponsoriOMEDICO AGRan2017 to 2032Enrolled6,150ConditionsBreast Cancer
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Observational
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. E-Cadherin-Mediated Cell-Cell Adhesion and Invasive Lobular Breast Cancer.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2025
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

15 authors.

M ThillAgaplesion Markus Krankenhaus, Frankfurt, Germany.
M-O ZahnMVZ Onkologische Kooperation Harz, Goslar, Germany.
A WeltUniversitätsklinikum Essen, Essen, Germany.
E StickelerUniversitätsklinikum Aachen, Aachen, Germany.
A NuschPraxis für Hämatologie und internistische Onkologie, Ratingen, Germany.
T FietzSchwerpunktpraxis für Hämatologie und internistische Onkologie, Singen, Germany.
J RauhGemeinschaftspraxis Innere Medizin, Witten, Germany.
N WetzeliOMEDICO, Freiburg, Germany.
L KruggeliOMEDICO, Freiburg, Germany.
M JänickeiOMEDICO, Freiburg, Germany.
N MarschnerPraxis für interdisziplinäre Onkologie und Hämatologie, Freiburg, Germany.
N HarbeckBrustzentrum, Frauenklinik LMU Klinikum, Munich, Germany.
A WöckelUniversitätsklinikum Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany.
T DeckerOnkologie Ravensburg, Praxis für Hämatologie und Onkologie GbR, Ravensburg, Germany. thomas.decker@onkonet.eu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3814-8775
OPAL study group

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeEvidence about routine treatment and outcome of patients with invasive lobular cancer (ILC) is limited, especially regarding metastatic disease. Here we present prospective real-world data of patients with metastatic ILC (mILC) as compared to patients with metastatic invasive ductal cancer (mIDC) receiving systemic therapy in routine care in Germany.

methodsProspective data on patient and tumor characteristics, treatments, and outcomes of patients with mILC (n = 466) and mIDC (n = 2100), recruited between 2007 and 2021 into the Tumor Registry Breast Cancer/OPAL were analyzed.

resultsCompared to mIDCs, patients with mILC were older at start of first-line treatment (median 69 vs. 63 years) and had more often lower grade (G1/G2: 72.8% vs. 51.2%), hormone receptor (HR)-positive (83.7% vs. 73.2%) and less often HER2-positive (14.2% vs. 28.6%) tumors, which metastasized more frequently to the bone (19.7% vs. 14.5%) or peritoneum (9.9% vs. 2.0%), and less frequently to the lungs (0.9% vs. 4.0%). Median OS of patients with mILC (n = 209) and mIDC (n = 1158) was 30.2 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 25.3, 36.0] and 33.7 months [95% CI 30.3, 37.9], respectively. Multivariate survival analysis did not show a significant prognostic impact of the histological subtype [HR mILC vs. mIDC 1.18 (95% CI 0.97-1.42)].

conclusionOverall, our real-world data confirm clinicopathological differences between mILC and mIDC breast cancer patients. Despite patients with mILC presenting with some favorable prognostic factors, ILC histopathology was not associated with a better clinical outcome in multivariate analysis, suggesting the need for more tailored treatment strategies for patients with the lobular subtype.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsCarcinoma, Ductal, BreastCarcinoma, LobularErb-b2 Receptor Tyrosine KinasesFemaleHumansPrognosisProspective StudiesRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeErb-b2 Receptor Tyrosine KinasesBreast neoplasmsProspective studiesRegistriesTreatment outcome

Identifiers

PMID36807725
PMCPMC10036409

What OpenQuestion holds

Textfull text, public
LicenceCC BY
measurements read49
identifiers read2
Read underepoch 390

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.