ArticleHCA healthcare journal of medicine2026
Comparing the Expression of Estrogen Receptors, Progesterone Receptors, and Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2 Between Initial Biopsy and Excision Specimens in Invasive Breast Carcinoma Cases. Is There a Need for Universal Repeat Testing? Experience From a Community Hospital.
Article in HCA healthcare journal of medicine, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The current national recommendation is that breast biomarkers estrogen receptors (ER), progesterone receptors (PR), and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) testing should be done on all primary invasive breast carcinomas and on recurrent or metastatic tumors. Repeat testing on a subsequent excision specimen is not indicated unless results appear discordant with the histopathologic findings. The objective of the current study was to evaluate the need for adopting universal reflex re-testing of breast biomarkers in excision specimens in our institution. Methods: The study population included 70 sequential invasive breast cancer patients where the results of ER, PR, and HER2 in the initial diagnostic biopsy were available for comparison with our repeated ER, PR, and HER2 testing in the resection specimens. We aimed to identify if there are a significant number of discordant cases and if there are any significant tumor variables (size, ductal carcinoma in situ [DCIS], nodal [N] stage, neoadjuvant therapy) in the discordant cases. Results: Of the 70 patients, 10 (14%) had discordant results. Seventeen (24.3%) received neoadjuvant therapy. The discordance rate was 7.5% in the control (non-neoadjuvant therapy) group and 35.3% in the neoadjuvant therapy group ( Conclusion: Adopting universal reflex re-testing of breast biomarkers in all excision specimens is not justified by our results. Our center will implement reflex re-testing as the new standard of care for all post-neoadjuvant therapy cases, as well as for tumors measuring greater than 2 cm.
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.