ArticleBMC cancer2025
Predicting breast cancer prognosis using PR and PIK3CA biomarkers: a comparative analysis of diagnostic groups.
Article in BMC cancer, 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.
- The impact of liquid biopsy in breast cancer: Redefining the landscape of non-invasive precision oncology.The journal of liquid biopsy · 2025Review
- Tumor Mutational Landscape and Its Correlation With Histopathological Characteristics in Breast Cancer.Cancer genomics & proteomicsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate the prognostic significance of progesterone receptor (PR) expression and the PIK3CA mutation status in HR+/HER2 - breast cancer patients, with the goal of screening patients who may derive the greatest benefit from PI3K-targeted therapy.
methodsA retrospective analysis was conducted on 152 HR+/HER2 - breast cancer patients stratified by PR expression levels and PIK3CA mutation status. The study population was divided into groups on the basis of a median PR threshold of 50% and further subdivided by PIK3CA mutation status. To evaluate the variability of clinicopathologic features among these groups, t tests and ANOVA were employed. The influence of these variables on survival was analyzed via Cox regression. Additionally, a risk prediction model was developed using the PR expression level and PIK3CA mutation status. The prognostic utility of this model was examined via both Kaplan‒Meier (KM) survival curves and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analyses. These methods have also been utilized to explore the associations between clinicopathologic parameters and clinical outcomes with respect to survival prediction and prognosis.
resultsSignificant differences in age, ER expression, and Ki67, HER2, and PIK3CA mutation status were detected between the groups (P < 0.05). Specifically, elevated PR expression was correlated with lower levels of Ki67 and low HER2 expression. The presence of a PIK3CA mutation was significantly linked to survival outcomes according to both univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses. Moreover, ROC analysis revealed that models incorporating both PR expression and PIK3CA mutation status achieved the highest level of diagnostic precision (AUC = 0.82).
conclusionPR expression and PIK3CA mutation status are significant prognostic markers in HR+/HER2 - breast cancer patients. Assessing these biomarkers in combination can enhance prognostic stratification, potentially guiding more informed clinical decision-making.
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.