Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38806682›Full record

ArticleNPJ precision oncology2024

Genetic landscape of interval and screen detected breast cancer.

Charlie Mills, Amit Sud, Andrew Everall, Daniel Chubb, Samuel E D Lawrence, Ben Kinnersley, Alex J Cornish, Robert Bentham, Richard S Houlston

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in NPJ precision oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Charlie Mills *Division of Genetics and Epidemiology, The Institute of Cancer Research, Sutton, Surrey, SM2 5NG, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4755-7549
Amit Sud *Division of Genetics and Epidemiology, The Institute of Cancer Research, Sutton, Surrey, SM2 5NG, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6133-0164
Andrew Everall *Division of Genetics and Epidemiology, The Institute of Cancer Research, Sutton, Surrey, SM2 5NG, UK.
Daniel ChubbDivision of Genetics and Epidemiology, The Institute of Cancer Research, Sutton, Surrey, SM2 5NG, UK.
Samuel E D LawrenceDivision of Genetics and Epidemiology, The Institute of Cancer Research, Sutton, Surrey, SM2 5NG, UK.
Ben KinnersleyDivision of Genetics and Epidemiology, The Institute of Cancer Research, Sutton, Surrey, SM2 5NG, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1783-6296
Alex J CornishDivision of Genetics and Epidemiology, The Institute of Cancer Research, Sutton, Surrey, SM2 5NG, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3966-3501
Robert BenthamUniversity College London Cancer Institute, University College London, London, UK.
Richard S HoulstonDivision of Genetics and Epidemiology, The Institute of Cancer Research, Sutton, Surrey, SM2 5NG, UK. richard.houlston@icr.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5268-0242

Funding

Academy of Medical Sciences Starter grant for clinical lecturersCancer Research UK (CRUK) C1298/A8362Wellcome Trust 214388Wellcome Trust 227000Wellcome Trust 227000/Z/23/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Interval breast cancers (IBCs) are cancers diagnosed between screening episodes. Understanding the biological differences between IBCs and screen-detected breast-cancers (SDBCs) has the potential to improve mammographic screening and patient management. We analysed and compared the genomic landscape of 288 IBCs and 473 SDBCs by whole genome sequencing of paired tumour-normal patient samples collected as part of the UK 100,000 Genomes Project. Compared to SDBCs, IBCs were more likely to be lobular, higher grade, and triple negative. A more aggressive clinical phenotype was reflected in IBCs displaying features of genomic instability including a higher mutation rate and number of chromosomal structural abnormalities, defective homologous recombination and TP53 mutations. We did not however, find evidence to indicate that IBCs are associated with a significantly different immune response. While IBCs do not represent a unique molecular class of invasive breast cancer they exhibit a more aggressive phenotype, which is likely to be a consequence of the timing of tumour initiation. This information is relevant both with respect to treatment as well as informing the screening interval for mammography.

Identifiers

PMID38806682
PMCPMC11133314

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.