ArticleJCI insight2024
Molecular subtyping improves breast cancer diagnosis in the Copenhagen Breast Cancer Genomics Study.
Article in JCI insight, 2024. 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.
- Immune Checkpoint Blockade and Emerging Combination Platforms in Breast Cancer: A Narrative Review.Breast cancer (Dove Medical Press) · 2026Review
- Stromal COL11A1: Mechanisms of Stroma-Driven Multidrug Resistance in Breast Cancer and Biomarker Potential.Biomedicines · 2025Review
- Article
- Enhancing HER2-low breast cancer detection with quantitative transcriptomics.NPJ breast cancer · 2025Article
- A comprehensive bioinformatic evaluation of the NTRK family's potential as prognostic biomarkers in breast cancer.Bioinformatics advances · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUNDIntrinsic molecular subtypes define distinct biological breast cancers and can be used to further improve diagnosis and risk allocation.METHODSThe Copenhagen Breast Cancer Genomics Study (CBCGS) prospectively included women diagnosed with breast cancer at Rigshospitalet from 2014 to 2021. Eligible patients were females with a primary invasive breast cancer (T1c, if N0M0; otherwise, any T, any N, or any M stage) and no prior malignancy. All patients underwent molecular profiling with the CIT256 and PAM50 molecular profile.RESULTSIn the study period, 2,816 patients were included in the CBCGS. Molecular subtyping showed an increase in nonluminal (molecular-apocrine, luminal C, and Basal-like) as compared with luminal (luminal A, luminal B, and Normal-like) subtypes with increasing stage from I to IV. Across all stages, we found a significant difference in survival among subtypes; 91% of patients with LumA were alive at 5 years compared with 91% for LumB, 84% for LumC, 82% for mApo, and 80% for Basal-like. We identified 442 tumors (16%) that were discordant in subtype between CIT256 and IHC. Discordant subtype proved to be a risk factor of death among patients with IHC luminal breast cancer (hazard ratio [HR], 2.08; 95% CI, 1.51-2.86) in a multivariable Cox regression analysis. Discordance occurred more often among patients with N3, stage IV, or grade III disease.CONCLUSIONOur findings indicate that molecular subtypes are a predominant classification for survival. Assessment is particularly crucial for patients with IHC luminal breast cancer with known high-risk factors, since they are at an increased risk of harboring an aggressive molecular subtype.
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.