ArticleCancer science2025
Evaluation of MAGE-A4 expression in breast cancer and its impact on prognosis.
Article in Cancer science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Special Issue "Molecular Research and Cellular Biology of Breast Cancer".International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Article
- Identification and validation of an intratumor heterogeneity-related prognostic signature in triple-negative breast cancer: a study based on integrative machine learning and single-cell sequencing.Breast cancer research : BCR · 2026Article
- Evaluation of MAGE-A4 expression in breast cancer and its impact on prognosis.Cancer science · 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
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Melanoma-associated antigen (MAGE)-A4, a cancer testis antigen, presents a promising target for chimeric antigen receptor T cell therapy in refractory solid tumors, including breast cancer (BC). However, the lack of highly specific Abs against MAGE-A4 is a major challenge for the development of MAGE-A4-targeted immunotherapies. This study aimed to validate the specificity of a novel MAGE-A4 Ab (E701U) and examine MAGE-A4 expression in clinical BC samples. MAGE-A1, -A2B, -A3, -A4, -A6, -A9, -A10, and -A12 genes were transfected into HEK293 cells. MAGE-A4 expression in each inserted cell block was evaluated using an E701U Ab. Subsequently, we evaluated MAGE-A4 expression in 403 primary BC tissue samples by immunohistochemistry using E701U and analyzed the clinical impact of MAGE-A4 in patients with early BC. The results showed that MAGE-A4 expression was limited to cells transduced with the MAGE-A4 gene. MAGE-A4 expression was observed in 5.7% of the BC samples. Positivity in triple-negative BC was significantly higher than in the other subtypes. The 5-year overall survival rate of patients with MAGE-A4(+) was significantly worse than those with MAGE-A4(-) BC. Moreover, the 5-year recurrence-free survival (RFS) rate of patients with MAGE-A4(+) BC was significantly lower than that of patients with MAGE-A4(-) BC. MAGE-A4 expression was an independent prognostic factor for RFS. In conclusion, the E701U Ab showed reliable specificity for MAGE-A4 expression among MAGE family genes. Patients with MAGE-A4(+) BC have an unfavorable prognosis and represent potential candidates for MAGE-A4-specific immunotherapy.
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.