SynthesisJournal of the National Cancer Institute2025
Validation of a breast cancer assay for radiotherapy omission: an individual participant data meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Endothelial Cell pY397-FAK Expression Predicts the Risk of Breast Cancer Recurrences after Radiotherapy in the SweBCG91-RT Cohort.Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research · 2025Trial
- Predicting immune responsiveness in ER-positive breast cancer for personalized therapy: a population-based study.NPJ precision oncology · 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
24 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThere are currently no molecular tests to identify individual breast cancers where radiotherapy (RT) offers no benefit. Profile for the Omission of Local Adjuvant Radiotherapy (POLAR) is a 16-gene molecular signature developed to identify low-risk cancers where RT will not further reduce recurrence rates.
methodsAn individual participant data meta-analysis was performed in 623 patients of node-negative estrogen receptor-positive and HER2-negative early breast cancer enrolled in 3 RT randomized trials for whom primary tumor material was available for analysis. A Cox proportional hazards model on time to locoregional recurrence was used to test the interaction between POLAR score and RT.
resultsA total of 429 (69%) patients' tumors had a high POLAR score, and 194 (31%) had a low score. Patients with high POLAR score had, in the absence of RT, a 10-year cumulative incidence of locoregional recurrence (20%, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 15% to 26%, vs 5%, [CI] 2% to 11%) for those with a low score. Patients with a high POLAR score had a large benefit from RT (hazard ratio [HR] for RT vs no RT = 0.37, 95% CI = 0.23 to 0.60; P < .001). In contrast, there was no evidence of benefit from RT for patients with a low POLAR score (HR = 0.92, 95% CI = 0.42 to 2.02; P = .832). The test for interaction between RT and POLAR was statistically significant (P = .022).
conclusionsPOLAR is not only prognostic for locoregional recurrence but also predictive of benefit from RT in selected patients. Patients aged 50 years and older with estrogen receptor-positive and HER2-negative disease and a low POLAR score could consider omitting adjuvant RT. Further validation in contemporary clinical cohorts is required.
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.