↓ Skip to main content

Biological subtyping of early breast cancer: a study comparing RT-qPCR with immunohistochemistry

Overview of attention for article published in Breast Cancer Research and Treatment, May 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (93rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
3 news outlets
policy
1 policy source
patent
2 patents
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
32 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
52 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Biological subtyping of early breast cancer: a study comparing RT-qPCR with immunohistochemistry
Published in
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment, May 2016
DOI 10.1007/s10549-016-3835-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ralph M. Wirtz, Harri Sihto, Jorma Isola, Päivi Heikkilä, Pirkko-Liisa Kellokumpu-Lehtinen, Päivi Auvinen, Taina Turpeenniemi-Hujanen, Sirkku Jyrkkiö, Sotiris Lakis, Kornelia Schlombs, Mark Laible, Stefan Weber, Sebastian Eidt, Ugur Sahin, Heikki Joensuu

Abstract

The biological subtype of breast cancer influences the selection of systemic therapy. Distinction between luminal A and B cancers depends on consistent assessment of Ki-67, but substantial intra-observer and inter-observer variability exists when immunohistochemistry (IHC) is used. We compared RT-qPCR with IHC in the assessment of Ki-67 and other standard factors used in breast cancer subtyping. RNA was extracted from archival breast tumour tissue of 769 women randomly assigned to the FinHer trial. Cancer ESR1, PGR, ERBB2 and MKI67 mRNA content was quantitated with an RT-qPCR assay. Local pathologists assessed ER, PgR and Ki-67 expression using IHC. HER2 amplification was identified with chromogenic in situ hybridization (CISH) centrally. The results were correlated with distant disease-free survival (DDFS) and overall survival (OS). qPCR-based and IHC-based assessments of ER and PgR showed good concordance. Both low tumour MKI67 mRNA (RT-qPCR) and Ki-67 protein (IHC) levels were prognostic for favourable DDFS [hazard ratio (HR) 0.42, 95 % CI 0.25-0.71, P = 0.001; and HR 0.56, 0.37-0.84, P = 0.005, respectively] and OS. In multivariable analyses, cancer MKI67 mRNA content had independent influence on DDFS (adjusted HR 0.51, 95 % CI 0.29-0.89, P = 0.019) while Ki-67 protein expression had not any influence (P = 0.266) whereas both assessments influenced independently OS. Luminal B patients treated with docetaxel-FEC had more favourable DDFS and OS than those treated with vinorelbine-FEC when the subtype was defined by RT-qPCR (for DDFS, HR 0.52, 95 % CI 0.29-0.94, P = 0.031), but not when defined using IHC. Breast cancer subtypes approximated with RT-qPCR and IHC show good concordance, but cancer MKI67 mRNA content correlated slightly better with DDFS than Ki-67 expression. The findings based on MKI67 mRNA content suggest that patients with luminal B cancer benefit more from docetaxel-FEC than from vinorelbine-FEC.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 52 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Finland 1 2%
Brazil 1 2%
Unknown 50 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 10 19%
Student > Master 6 12%
Student > Bachelor 5 10%
Other 4 8%
Professor 3 6%
Other 10 19%
Unknown 14 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 13 25%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 8%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 4%
Other 8 15%
Unknown 14 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 29. 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 06 September 2023.
All research outputs
#1,252,198
of 24,413,320 outputs
Outputs from Breast Cancer Research and Treatment
#135
of 4,855 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#23,218
of 340,106 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Breast Cancer Research and Treatment
#2
of 108 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,413,320 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,855 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 340,106 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 108 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.