ArticleWiener klinische Wochenschrift2023
Axillary lymph node status and invasive lobular breast cancer : Analysis of the Clinical Tumor Register of the AGO Austria.
Article in Wiener klinische Wochenschrift, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Multidimensional Cellular Micro-Compartments to Model Invasive Lobular Carcinoma Dormancy.Advanced healthcare materials · 2026Article
- Axillary Nodal Positivity in Early-Stage Invasive Lobular Carcinoma: Implications for Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy Omission.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Article
- A prospective single-arm pilot study evaluating [F-18]fluoroestradiol dedicated breast PET in invasive lobular carcinoma after neoadjuvant endocrine therapy.Breast cancer research : BCR · 2026Article
- Invasive lobular breast carcinoma variants; clinicopathological features and patient outcomes.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2025Article
- Special Types of Breast Cancer: Clinical Behavior and Radiological Appearance.Journal of imaging · 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
15 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundInvasive lobular carcinoma (ILC) represents the second most common type of invasive breast cancer (BC). Although ILC generally have good prognostic properties (positive estrogen receptor, ER, low tumor grade), they are generally diagnosed at a more advanced stage. The data on the axillary lymph node status in ILC compared to invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC) are considered controversial. Therefore, the aim of this study was to compare the pathological node stage (pN) between ILC and IDC in an Austria-wide register.
methodsData of the Clinical Tumor Register (Klinisches TumorRegister, KTR) of the Austrian Association for Gynecological Oncology (AGO) were retrospectively analyzed. Patients with primary early BC, invasive lobular or ductal, diagnosed between January 2014 and December 2018, and primary surgery were included. A total of 2127 tumors were evaluated and compared in 2 groups, ILC n = 303, IDC n = 1824.
resultsA total of 2095 patients were analyzed in the study. In the multivariate analysis, pN2 and pN3 were observed significantly more frequently in ILC compared with IDC (odds ratio, OR 1.93; 95% confidence interval, CI 1.19-3.14; p = 0.008 and OR 3.22; 95% CI: 1.47-7.03; p = 0.003; respectively). Other factors associated with ILC were tumor grades 2 and 3, positive ER, and pathological tumor stage (pT) 2 and pT3. In contrast, concomitant ductal carcinoma in situ, overexpression of the human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2), and a moderate and high proliferation rate (Ki67) were found less frequently in ILC.
conclusionThe data show an increased risk of extensive axillary lymph node metastasis (pN2/3) in ILC.
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.