ArticleBreast cancer (Tokyo, Japan)2025
Treatment and prognosis of patients with hormone receptor-low positive (1%-10%) breast cancer: a retrospective propensity score-matched analysis.
Article in Breast cancer (Tokyo, Japan), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study aimed to investigate the clinicopathological characteristics, treatment patterns, and survival outcomes of hormone receptor (HR)-low positive (1%-10%) breast cancer, with a focus on evaluating the prognostic impact of endocrine therapy (ET) and its interplay with HR-low positive categories (ER-low/PR-low, ER-low/PR-negative, ER-negative/PR-low).
methodsA retrospective analysis of 16,578 patients with stage I-III breast cancer (July 2009 to December 2019) identified 388 HR-low positive cases. Propensity score match (PSM) was used to balance baseline characteristics in two comparisons: (1) HR-low positive patients receiving ET vs. HR-negative patients; (2) HR-low positive patients with vs. without ET. 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) and breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) were analyzed via Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analyses. Subgroup and interaction analyses assessed ET efficacy across HR-low positive categories.
resultsHR-low positive tumors (2.34%) exhibited clinicopathological similarities to HR-negative tumors but distinct from HR-positive tumors. ET administration significantly improved DFS of HR-low positive patients compared to HR-negative counterparts (84.89% vs. 75.87%; HR = 0.59 [0.37-0.93], P = 0.024). Within HR-low positive cohort, ET omission was significantly associated with a 74% increased risk of DFS compared to ET-treated patients (75.54% vs. 85.37%; HR = 1.74 [1.01-3.00], P = 0.047). ET duration (1-4 vs. 5 years) did not affect survival outcomes (DFS: P = 0.533; BCSS: P = 0.675). Multivariate analysis confirmed ET omission as an independent risk factor for worse DFS (HR = 1.75 [1.01-3.05], P = 0.046). Subgroup analysis revealed equivalent ET benefit across all HR-low positive categories (P for interaction > 0.9).
conclusionHR-low positive breast cancer has similar clinicopathological characteristics and therapeutic options with HR-negative disease but derives significant DFS benefits from ET, irrespective of ET duration or HR category. These findings support integrating ET into standard management protocol for HR-low positive breast cancer to ameliorate survival outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40490673What 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.