ArticleFrontiers in oncology2024
Comparison of clinical characteristics and outcomes in primary neuroendocrine breast carcinoma versus invasive ductal carcinoma.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Background: Neuroendocrine breast carcinoma (NECB) is a rare, special histologic type of breast cancer. There are some small sample studies on the clinical outcomes of NECB patients, which are worthy of further discussion. Methods: We conducted a retrospective case-control study of clinical characteristics and outcomes among patients with primary NECB versus invasive carcinoma of no special type (NST) between November 2004 and November 2017 in the Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Beijing. NST patients were strictly matched 1:4 during the same period based on the TNM stage. Statistical comparisons were performed to determine the differences in survival between NST and NECB patients and to identify clinical factors that correlate with prognosis. Results: A total of 121 participants affected by primary NECB were included in our analysis from November 2004 to November 2017. Elderly persons (>60 years of age) were more likely to have primary NECB than young persons (p=0.001). In addition, primary NECB patients had significantly higher odds of having tumors 2-5 cm (36.5%) and >5 cm (6.1%) in size than NST patients. Despite a significant difference in tumor size, the proportion of patients with lymph node metastases showed no difference between the two groups (p=0.021). In addition, the rate of patients with ER-negative tumors in the NECB group (4.2%) was significantly lower than that in the primary NST group (29.8%). Significant differences were noted in the PR-negative (13.3% versus 36.6%, P<0.001) and HER2-negative (90.5% versus 76.4%, P=0.001) expression statuses among these patients. Of 121 primary NECB patients, 11 (9.1%) experienced relapses during the follow-up period. We found that tumor size was an independent risk factor for relapse. For hormone receptors on tumor cells, ER-positive breast cancer patients had significantly lower odds of relapse than receptor-negative patients. Conclusions: Our data demonstrate no significant difference in mortality and relapse between the primary NECB and NST groups. The tumor size in the primary NECB group was significantly larger than that in the NST group. In addition, the absence of ER independently increased the relapse rate for breast carcinoma patients.
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.