ArticleGeburtshilfe und Frauenheilkunde2024
RANK and RANKL Expression in Tumors of Patients with Early Breast Cancer.
Article in Geburtshilfe und Frauenheilkunde, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prognostic value of RANK signalling in breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMJ open · 2025Pooled it
- Decoding breast cancer: insights into molecular pathways & therapeutic approaches.Discover oncology · 2025Review
- The role of genetics and epigenetics in breast cancer: A comprehensive review of metastasis, risk factors, and future perspectives.Journal of pharmaceutical analysis · 2025Review
- The Role of Osteoprotegerin in Breast Cancer: Genetic Variations, Tumorigenic Pathways, and Therapeutic Potential.Cancers · 2025Review
- Correlation of RANK and RANKL with mammographic density in primary breast cancer patients.Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 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
16 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: The receptor activator of nuclear factor-κB (RANK) pathway was associated with the pathogenesis of breast cancer. Several studies attempted to link the RANK/RANKL pathway to prognosis; however, with inconsistent outcomes. We aimed to further contribute to the knowledge about RANK/RANKL as prognostic factors in breast cancer. Within this study, protein expression of RANK and its ligand, RANKL, in the tumor tissue was analyzed in association with disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) in a study cohort of patients with early breast cancer. Patients and Methods: 607 samples of female primary and early breast cancer patients from the Bavarian Breast Cancer Cases and Controls Study were analyzed to correlate the RANK and RANKL expression with DFS and OS. Therefore, expression was quantified using immunohistochemical staining of a tissue microarray. H-scores were determined with the cut-off value of 8.5 for RANK and 0 for RANKL expression, respectively. Results: RANK and RANKL immunohistochemistry were assessed by H-score. Both biomarkers did not correlate (ρ = -0.04). According to molecular subtypes, triple-negative tumors and HER2-positive tumors showed a higher number of RANK-positive tumors (H-score ≥ 8.5), however, no subtype-specific expression of RANKL could be detected. Higher RANKL expression tended to correlate with a better prognosis. However, RANK and RANKL expression could not be identified as statistically significant prognostic factors within the study cohort. Conclusions: Tumor-specific RANK and RANKL expressions are not applicable as prognostic factors for DFS and OS, but might be associated with subtype-specific breast cancer progression.
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.