ArticleThe journal of pathology. Clinical research2024
High chromosomal instability is associated with higher 10-year risks of recurrence for hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative breast cancer patients: clinical evidence from a large-scale, multiple-site, retrospective study.
Article in The journal of pathology. Clinical research, 2024. 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.
- Single-Cell RNA-Seq Reveals Chromosomal Instability-Associated Transcriptomic Profiles in Breast Cancer.Biomedicines · 2026Article
- Chromosomal instability as a predictive biomarker for recurrence risk following transurethral resection of NMIBC.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Long-term survival varies among hormone receptor-positive (HR+) and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) breast cancer patients and is seriously impaired by metastasis. Chromosomal instability (CIN) was one of the key drivers of breast cancer metastasis. Here we evaluate CIN and 10-year invasive disease-free survival (iDFS) and overall survival (OS) in HR+/HER2-- breast cancer. In this large-scale, multiple-site, retrospective study, 354 HR+/HER2- breast cancer patients were recruited. Of these, 204 patients were used for internal training, 70 for external validation, and 80 for cross-validation. All medical records were carefully reviewed to obtain the disease recurrence information. Formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissue samples were collected, followed by low-pass whole-genome sequencing with a median genome coverage of 1.86X using minimal 1 ng DNA input. CIN was then assessed using a customized bioinformatics workflow. Three or more instances of CIN per sample was defined as high CIN and the frequency was 42.2% (86/204) in the internal cohort. High CIN correlated significantly with increased lymph node metastasis, vascular invasion, progesterone receptor negative status, HER2 low, worse pathological type, and performed as an independent prognostic factor for HR+/- breast cancer. Patients with high CIN had shorter iDFS and OS than those with low CIN [10-year iDFS 11.1% versus 82.2%, hazard ratio (HR) = 11.12, p < 0.01; 10-year OS 45.7% versus 94.3%, HR = 14.17, p < 0.01]. These findings were validated in two external cohorts with 70 breast cancer patients. Moreover, high CIN could predict the prognosis more accurately than Adjuvant! Online score (10-year iDFS 11.1% versus 48.6%, HR = 2.71, p < 0.01). Cross-validation analysis found that high consistency (83.8%) was observed between CIN and MammaPrint score, while only 45% between CIN and Adjuvant! Online score. In conclusion, high CIN is an independent prognostic indicator for HR+/HER2- breast cancer with shorter iDFS and OS and holds promise for predicting recurrence and metastasis.
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.