ArticleCureus2025
The Magee Equation: A Potential Economic Alternative in the Prognostication of Patients With Breast Cancer.
Article in Cureus, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionBreast cancer is a heterogeneous disease classified by histopathological and molecular features. While the Oncotype DX assay is widely used to predict prognosis in estrogen receptor (ER)-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative cases, its high cost limits accessibility. The Magee equations, derived from immunohistochemical and clinicopathological variables, offer a cost-effective alternative for recurrence risk estimation. The Clinical Treatment Score at 5 years (CTS5) model further aids in predicting late distant recurrence using routine clinical parameters. AIM AND
objectivesTo derive the Magee Equation 3 (ME3) and CTS5 scores in each patient and categorize them into prognostic groups. To compare the ME3 score with the CTS5 score and observe the treatment response/recurrence rate in the study population. To hypothesize the validity and utility of the ME3 score as a cheaper alternative to more expensive genetic tests. MATERIALS AND
methodsA cross-sectional study of 50 consecutive cases of primary breast cancer, which are ER/progesterone receptor (PR) positive, has been included in the study. The CTS5 and ME3 recurrence score (RS) were calculated using the online websites https://cts5-calculator.com and https://path.upmc.edu/onlineTools/mageeequations.html, respectively. The results were tabulated. The follow-up records of patients were reviewed.
resultsA total of 50 cases of breast carcinoma were included. The number of cases in low-, intermediate-, and high-risk categories of the CTS5 score was 26 cases (52%), 19 cases (36%), and five cases (10%), respectively. The number of cases in low-, intermediate-, and high-risk categories of ME3 RS was two cases (4%), 31 cases (62%), and 17 cases (34%), respectively. A high level of concordance between ME3 RS and CTS5 scores was observed in the intermediate category (20%; n = 10).
conclusionThe Magee Equation 3 (ME3) is a reliable, simple, and cost-effective tool that correlates well with the CTS5 model, making it a practical alternative for predicting recurrence risk and guiding treatment decisions in breast cancer.
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.