2019
DOI: 10.1158/1940-6207.capr-19-0051
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Breast Hyperplasias, Risk Signature, and Breast Cancer

Abstract: We address the dilemma faced by oncologists in administering preventative measures to "at risk" patients diagnosed with atypical and nonatypical hyperplasias due to lack of any molecular means of risk stratification and identifying high-risk subjects. Our study purpose is to investigate a four marker risk signature, MMP-1, CEACAM6, HYAL1, and HEC1, using 440 hyperplastic tissues for identifying high-risk subjects who will benefit from preventative therapies. We assayed the markers by IHC and combined their exp… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
2
1

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 43 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Many efforts to identify predictive biomarkers of upgraded B3 lesions have failed because of either a lack of sensitivity: the “low risk” group still has a considerable risk of upgrade [ 33 ], the predictive feature is not reproducible [ 34 , 35 ] or the feature is only prognostic after full excision [ 32 , 36 ]. Overall, predictive features are inconsistent across studies and many of the features require highly experienced pathologists and radiologists to interpret the available data.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Many efforts to identify predictive biomarkers of upgraded B3 lesions have failed because of either a lack of sensitivity: the “low risk” group still has a considerable risk of upgrade [ 33 ], the predictive feature is not reproducible [ 34 , 35 ] or the feature is only prognostic after full excision [ 32 , 36 ]. Overall, predictive features are inconsistent across studies and many of the features require highly experienced pathologists and radiologists to interpret the available data.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Many efforts to identify predictive biomarkers of upgraded B3 lesions have failed because of either a lack of specificity: the “low risk” group still has a considerable risk of upgrade [29], the predictive feature is not reproducible [30, 31] or the feature is only prognostic after full excision [28, 32]. Overall, predictive features are inconsistent across studies and many of the features require highly experienced pathologists and radiologists to interpret the available data.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%