ReviewCell proliferation
Prognosis and prediction of response in breast cancer: the current role of the main biological markers.
Review in Cell proliferation. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 39 citations in OpenAlex.
- Targeting epidermal growth factor-overexpressing triple-negative breast cancer by natural killer cells expressing a specific chimeric antigen receptor.Cell proliferation · 2020Article
- Early changes in apoptosis and proliferation following primary chemotherapy for breast cancer.British journal of cancer · 2003Article
- Nuclear thymidylate synthase expression, p53 expression and 5FU response in colorectal carcinoma.British journal of cancer · 2001Article
- Molecular pathology of tumor metastasis. I. Predictive pathology.Pathology oncology research : POR · 2001Review
- Loss of anti-mitotic effects of Bcl-2 with retention of anti-apoptotic activity during tumor progression in a mouse model.Oncogene · 1999Article
- Proteomic definition of normal human luminal and myoepithelial breast cells purified from reduction mammoplasties.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 1999Article
- Cell cycle checkpoints as therapeutic targets.Journal of mammary gland biology and neoplasia · 1999Review
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In the medical literature there are frequently conflicting reports on the utility of biological tumour markers available in the clinical management of breast cancer. In this review we analyse current information on the relationships between the most widely investigated breast cancer biological markers including oestrogen and progesterone receptors, p53, Bcl-2, c-erbB-2, cyclin expression, proliferative activity, DNA ploidy and the urokinase plasminogen activation system, as well as their relevance to prognosis and response to clinical treatment. By biological prognostic indicator, we mean a marker that correlates with survival and disease-free survival; the term predictor marker indicates a marker that is capable of predicting tumour sensitivity or resistance to various therapies. Similarly to other authors' experiences, our analysis suggests that oestrogen receptors are weak prognostic indicators and good predictors of response to endocrine therapy. Furthermore, there are consistent data suggesting that proliferation indices are good indicators of prognosis, and that they are directly related to response to chemotherapy and closely related to response to hormonotherapy. On the contrary, there is no evidence or conflicting data for all of the other biological markers. These should be considered in the context of randomized trials in order to precisely define their prognostic and predictive roles. p53 and c-erbB-2 seem to be the most promising factors, but their use in routine practice still needs validation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
9853425PMC6495893W2134325872What 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.