ArticleFrontiers in oncology2026
Case report: Secretory carcinoma of the breast with ETV6-NTRK3 fusion: clinicopathological features and molecular confirmation by FISH in two cases.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Secretory carcinoma of the breast (SCB) is an extremely rare malignant neoplasm, accounting for less than 0.15% of all breast carcinomas. It is characterized by distinctive secretory activity, a frequently triple-negative immunophenotype, and recurrent ETV6-NTRK3 fusion (1-3). Case presentations: We report two Chinese women with SCB. Case 1 involved a 55-year-old woman with a 1.2-cm mass, and Case 2 involved a 43-year-old woman with a 3.8-cm mass. Both tumors showed characteristic morphology, including microcystic/tubulocystic, solid, tubular, and focally papillary growth patterns, abundant eosinophilic secretory material, granular eosinophilic or vacuolated cytoplasm, and minimal cytologic atypia. Immunohistochemistry revealed a triple-negative phenotype (ER-negative, PR-negative, and HER2-negative) with diffuse S-100 and CK5/6 positivity. Mammaglobin and MUC4 showed membranous positivity, whereas DOG1 was negative in tumor cells at ×100 magnification. These findings provided ancillary support for secretory differentiation and helped exclude acinic cell carcinoma. AB-PAS staining showed positive intracytoplasmic secretory material in tumor cells at ×200 magnification. ETV6-NTRK3 fusion was confirmed by FISH in both tumors (75% and 80% of tumor nuclei), supporting the diagnosis of SCB. Both patients underwent breast-conserving surgery. Case 1 had no nodal metastasis (0/2; T1cN0M0, AJCC 8th edition), whereas Case 2 had sentinel lymph node metastasis (1/3; T2N1aM0, AJCC 8th edition), followed by axillary lymph node dissection (0/23). Both patients received adjuvant chemotherapy and radiation therapy. No locoregional recurrence or distant metastasis was observed during short-to-intermediate follow-up of 18 months in Case 1 and 30 months in Case 2. However, these observations reflect only the current clinical status of the two patients and are insufficient to support conclusions regarding long-term prognosis. Conclusions: These cases highlight the diagnostic challenges of SCB and underscore the importance of integrating morphology, immunohistochemistry, and FISH-based molecular confirmation. ETV6-NTRK3 fusion may represent a potential therapeutic option only in selected patients with advanced, unresectable, recurrent, or metastatic NTRK fusion-positive disease. Neither patient in the present report had advanced disease, received TRK inhibitor therapy, or underwent functional validation of the fusion. Therefore, no conclusion regarding therapeutic efficacy can be drawn from these two localized cases. Long-term follow-up remains necessary because late recurrence and distant metastasis have been reported in the literature, and the short-to-intermediate follow-up in the present cases does not allow definitive prognostic conclusions.
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.