ArticlePloS one2025
Modification of the nuclear pleomorphism score in the Modified Bloom-Richardson grading for invasive breast cancer.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
objectiveTo improve prognostic assessments in breast cancer by evaluating the efficacy of the modified Nottingham grading system, specifically focusing on nuclear pleomorphism through measurements of largest nuclear size (LNS) and nuclear size difference (NSD).
methodsThis cross-sectional study involved 140 invasive breast cancer cases at Hospital Universiti Sains Malaysia. The study consisted of two phases: Phase 1, which developed nuclear scoring criteria using histopathological images from 2013-2017, and Phase 2, which validated these criteria on cases from 2018-2019. Two sets of samples were included for the study, with 120 cases analyzed in Phase 1 and 53 cases in Phase 2. Descriptive statistics and normality tests assessed differences in LNS and NSD across original nuclear grades.
resultsSignificant differences were found in LNS and NSD across original nuclear grades (p < 0.05), with fair to moderate agreement between the modified grading system and pathologist assessments (Kappa = 0.367).
conclusionIncorporating LNS and NSD into the assessment of nuclear pleomorphism shows potential to improve objectivity in breast cancer grading. However, further validation using larger datasets and automated image analysis is necessary to refine this approach and assess its clinical applicability..
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.