ArticleGland surgery2026
Survival outcomes of invasive micropapillary carcinoma of the breast: a SEER population-based study.
Article in Gland surgery, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The prognostic significance of invasive micropapillary carcinoma (IMPC) histology in breast cancer is still debated. Additionally, the relationship between different molecular subtypes and survival outcomes in patients with IMPC and invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC) remains unknown. The objective of this study was to investigate whether breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) and overall survival (OS) differ between IMPC and IDC across molecular subtypes, to better inform subtype-aware risk stratification and personalized management. Methods: Using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database to identify breast cancer patients, we retrospectively analyzed 959 IMPC and 174,591 IDC cases diagnosed between 2010 and 2016 with non-metastatic diseases that underwent surgery. We compared long-term outcomes of BCSS and OS. Results: IMPC had a better BCSS (P=0.04) but showed no significant difference in OS (P=0.09) compared with IDC. In multivariate Cox analysis, IMPC histologic type was an independent favorable prognostic factor for both BCSS [hazard ratio (HR) =0.509, P=0.002] and OS (HR =0.637, P=0.003). After propensity score matching (PSM), IMPC still had a better BCSS (P=0.001); we observed no significant difference in OS (P=0.38). While different molecular subtypes have different impacts on survival outcomes, no significant differences were observed in BCSS and OS between IMPC and IDC in relation to Luminal B, human epidermal growth receptor 2 (HER2)-enriched, and triple-negative subtype. In relation to the Luminal A subtype, IMPC had better BCSS (HR =0.399, P=0.001) and OS (HR =0.508, P=0.001). In the case-control cohort, IMPC had a better BCSS (HR =0.423, P=0.005), while no significant difference was observed in OS (HR =0.767, P=0.22) in Luminal A subtype. Conclusions: Relative to IDC, IMPC presents better long-term survival outcomes, and the survival benefits are confined to the Luminal A subtype.
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.