↓ Skip to main content

Tumor PIK3CA Genotype and Prognosis in Early-Stage Breast Cancer: A Pooled Analysis of Individual Patient Data

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Clinical Oncology, February 2018
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 (81st percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
20 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
96 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
99 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Tumor PIK3CA Genotype and Prognosis in Early-Stage Breast Cancer: A Pooled Analysis of Individual Patient Data
Published in
Journal of Clinical Oncology, February 2018
DOI 10.1200/jco.2017.74.8301
Pubmed ID
Authors

Dimitrios Zardavas, Luc Te Marvelde, Roger L Milne, Debora Fumagalli, George Fountzilas, Vassiliki Kotoula, Evangelia Razis, George Papaxoinis, Heikki Joensuu, Mary Ellen Moynahan, Bryan T Hennessy, Ivan Bieche, Lao H Saal, Olle Stal, Barry Iacopetta, Jeanette Dupont Jensen, Sandra O'Toole, Elena Lopez-Knowles, Mattia Barbaraeschi, Shinzaburo Noguchi, Hatem A Azim, Enrique Lerma, Thomas Bachelot, Qing Wang, Gizeh Perez-Tenorio, Cornelis J H Can de Velde, Daniel W Rea, Vicky Sabine, John M S Bartlett, Christos Sotiriou, Stefan Michiels, Sherene Loi

Abstract

Purpose Phosphatidylinositol-4, 5-bisphosphate 3-kinase catalytic subunit alpha ( PIK3CA) mutations are frequently observed in primary breast cancer. We evaluated their prognostic relevance by performing a pooled analysis of individual patient data. Patients and Methods Associations between PIK3CA status and clinicopathologic characteristics were tested by applying Cox regression models adjusted for age, tumor size, nodes, grade, estrogen receptor (ER) status, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) status, treatment, and study. Invasive disease-free survival (IDFS) was the primary end point; distant disease-free survival (DDFS) and overall survival (OS) were also assessed, overall and by breast cancer subtypes. Results Data from 10,319 patients from 19 studies were included (median OS follow-up, 6.9 years); 1,787 patients (17%) received chemotherapy, 4,036 (39%) received endocrine monotherapy, 3,583 (35%) received both, and 913 (9%) received none or their treatment was unknown. PIK3CA mutations occurred in 32% of patients, with significant associations with ER positivity, increasing age, lower grade, and smaller size (all P < .001). Prevalence of PIK3CA mutations was 18%, 22%, and 37% in the ER-negative/HER2-negative, HER2-positive, and ER-positive/HER2-negative subtypes, respectively. In univariable analysis, PIK3CA mutations were associated with better IDFS (HR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.71 to 0.84; P < .001), with evidence for a stronger effect in the first years of follow-up (0 to 5 years: HR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.66 to 0.81; P < .001; 5 to 10 years: HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.68 to 0.99; P = .037); > 10 years: (HR, 1.15; 95% CI, 0.84 to 1.58; P = .38; P heterogeneity = .02). In multivariable analysis, PIK3CA genotype remained significant for improved IDFS ( P = .043), but not for the DDFS and OS end points. Conclusion In this large pooled analysis, PIK3CA mutations were significantly associated with a better IDFS, DDFS, and OS, but had a lesser prognostic effect after adjustment for other prognostic factors.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 20 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 99 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 99 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 19 19%
Other 11 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 11%
Student > Master 9 9%
Student > Bachelor 6 6%
Other 11 11%
Unknown 32 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 33 33%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 15 15%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 5%
Mathematics 2 2%
Unspecified 1 1%
Other 7 7%
Unknown 36 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 13 March 2018.
All research outputs
#3,242,047
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Clinical Oncology
#7,233
of 22,051 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#64,288
of 344,220 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Clinical Oncology
#144
of 278 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 22,051 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% 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 344,220 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 278 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.