Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39075505›Full record

SynthesisBMC medicine2024

An original study assessing biomarker success rate in breast cancer recurrence biomarker research.

K-V Savva, A MacKenzie, R C Coombes, N M Zhifang, B G Hanna, C J Peters

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. 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

6 authors.

K-V Savva *Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, 10th Floor QEQM Wing, St Mary's Hospital, London, W2 1NY, UK. k.savva17@imperial.ac.uk.
A MacKenzie *Division of Surgery, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK.
R C CoombesDepartment of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, 10th Floor QEQM Wing, St Mary's Hospital, London, W2 1NY, UK.
N M ZhifangDivision of Surgery, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK.
B G HannaDepartment of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, 10th Floor QEQM Wing, St Mary's Hospital, London, W2 1NY, UK.
C J PetersDepartment of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, 10th Floor QEQM Wing, St Mary's Hospital, London, W2 1NY, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBreast cancer is the second most common cause of cancer mortality worldwide. Biomarker discovery has led to advances in understanding molecular phenotyping and thus has a great potential for precision management of this diverse disease. Despite increased interest in the biomarker field, only a small number of breast cancer biomarkers are known to be clinically useful. Therefore, it is very important to characterise the success rate of biomarkers in this field and study potential reasons for the deficit. We therefore aim to achieve quantitative characterisation of the biomarker translation gap by tracking the progress of prognostic biomarkers associated with breast cancer recurrence.

methodsAn electronic systematic search was conducted in Medline and Embase databases using keywords and mesh headings associated with breast cancer recurrence biomarkers (1940-2023). Abstracts were screened, and primary clinical studies involving breast cancer recurrence biomarkers were selected. Upon identification of relevant literature, we extracted the biomarker name, date of publication and journal name. All analyses were performed using IBM SPSS Statistics and GraphPad prism (La Jolla, California, USA).

resultsA total of 19,195 articles were identified, from which 4597 articles reported breast cancer biomarkers associated with recurrence. Upon data extraction, 2437 individual biomarkers were identified. Out of these, 23 are currently recommended for clinical use, which corresponds to only 0.94% of all discovered biomarkers.

conclusionsThis study characterised for the first time the translational gap in the field of recurrence-related breast cancer biomarkers, indicating that only 0.94% of identified biomarkers were recommended for clinical use. This denotes an evident barrier in the biomarker research field and emphasises the need for a clearer route from biomarker discovery through to implementation.

Indexed as

Biomarkers, TumorBreast NeoplasmsNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalFemaleHumansPrognosisBiomarkers, TumorBiomarkersBreast cancerClinical utilityTranslational research

Identifiers

PMID39075505
PMCPMC11288100

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.