ArticleNPJ breast cancer2025
A pooled analysis evaluating prognostic significance of Residual Cancer Burden in invasive lobular breast cancer.
Article in NPJ breast cancer, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Impact of Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy on Surgical Outcomes and Conversion to Node-Negativity in Invasive Lobular Breast Cancer: Analysis of Molecularly High-Risk Tumors by Histologic Subtype on the I-SPY2 Clinical Trial.Annals of surgical oncology · 2025Trial
- Multidisciplinary Management Considerations in Invasive Lobular Breast Cancer: It Isn't Just Ductal.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Review
- A prospective single-arm pilot study evaluating [F-18]fluoroestradiol dedicated breast PET in invasive lobular carcinoma after neoadjuvant endocrine therapy.Breast cancer research : BCR · 2026Article
- Pitfalls in the Histological Diagnosis of Morphologic Variants of Invasive Lobular Carcinoma of the Breast.Modern pathology : an official journal of the United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology, Inc · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
46 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Residual Cancer Burden (RCB) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) is validated to predict event-free survival (EFS) in breast cancer but has not been studied for invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC). We studied patient-level data from a pooled cohort across 12 institutions. Associations between RCB index, class, and EFS were assessed in ILC and non-ILC with mixed effect Cox models and multivariable analyses. Recursive partitioning was used in an exploratory model to stratify prognosis by RCB components. Of 5106 patients, the diagnosis was ILC in 216 and non-ILC in 4890. Increased RCB index was associated with worse EFS in both ILC and non-ILC (p = 0.002 and p < 0.001, respectively) and remained prognostic when stratified by receptor subtype and adjusted for age, grade, T category, and nodal status. Recursive partitioning demonstrated residual invasive cancer cellularity as most prognostic in ILC. These results underscore the utility of RCB for evaluating NAC response in those with ILC.
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.