| Title |
Chemosensitivity and Endocrine Sensitivity in Clinical Luminal Breast Cancer Patients in the Prospective Neoadjuvant Breast Registry Symphony Trial (NBRST) Predicted by Molecular Subtyping
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Annals of Surgical Oncology, October 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1245/s10434-016-5600-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Pat Whitworth, Peter Beitsch, Angela Mislowsky, James V. Pellicane, Charles Nash, Mary Murray, Laura A. Lee, Carrie L. Dul, Michael Rotkis, Paul Baron, Lisette Stork-Sloots, Femke A. de Snoo, Jennifer Beatty |
| Abstract |
Hormone receptor-positive (HR+) tumors have heterogeneous biology and present a challenge for determining optimal treatment. In the Neoadjuvant Breast Registry Symphony Trial (NBRST) patients were classified according to MammaPrint/BluePrint subtyping to provide insight into the response to neoadjuvant endocrine therapy (NET) or neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NCT). The purpose of this predefined substudy was to compare MammaPrint/BluePrint with conventional 'clinical' immunohistochemistry/fluorescence in situ hybridization (IHC/FISH) subtyping in 'clinical luminal' [HR+/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-)] breast cancer patients to predict treatment sensitivity. NBRST IHC/FISH HR+/HER2- breast cancer patients (n = 474) were classified into four molecular subgroups by MammaPrint/BluePrint subtyping: Luminal A, Luminal B, HER2, and Basal type. Pathological complete response (pCR) rates were compared with conventional IHC/FISH subtype. The overall pCR rate for 'clinical luminal' patients to NCT was 11 %; however, 87 of these 474 patients were reclassified as Basal type by BluePrint, with a high pCR rate of 32 %. The MammaPrint index was highly associated with the likelihood of pCR (p < 0.001). Fifty-three patients with BluePrint Luminal tumors received NET with an aromatase inhibitor and 36 (68 %) had a clinical response. With BluePrint subtyping, 18 % of clinical 'luminal' patients are classified in a different subgroup, compared with conventional assessment, and these patients have a significantly higher response rate to NCT compared with BluePrint Luminal patients. MammaPrint/BluePrint subtyping can help allocate effective treatment to appropriate patients. In addition, accurate identification of subtype biology is important in the interpretation of neoadjuvant treatment response since lack of pCR in luminal patients does not portend the worse prognosis associated with residual disease in Basal and HER2 subtypes. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 5 | 83% |
| Unknown | 1 | 17% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 67% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 17% |
| Scientists | 1 | 17% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 116 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 116 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 16 | 14% |
| Researcher | 13 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 13 | 11% |
| Other | 9 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 4% |
| Other | 25 | 22% |
| Unknown | 35 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 51 | 44% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 8 | 7% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 3% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 3% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 3 | 3% |
| Other | 10 | 9% |
| Unknown | 36 | 31% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 10 November 2022.
All research outputs
#5,284,261
of 25,378,162 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Surgical Oncology
#1,706
of 7,275 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#81,466
of 324,267 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Surgical Oncology
#24
of 97 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,378,162 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,275 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 324,267 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 97 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.