The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Prognostic value of proliferation in invasive breast cancer: a review: Table 1
Open accessAbstract
Breast cancer is the leading cause of death among solid tumours in women, and its incidence is increasing in the West. Adjuvant chemotherapy and hormonal treatment improve survival but have potentially serious side effects, and are costly. Because adjuvant treatment should be given to high risk patients only, and traditional prognostic factors (lymph node status, tumour size) are insufficiently accurate, better predictors of high risk and treatment response are needed. Invasive breast cancer metastasises haematogenously very early on, so many breast cancer prognosticators are directly or indirectly related to proliferation. Although studies evaluating the role of individual proliferation regulating genes have greatly increased our knowledge of this complex process, the functional end result—cells dividing—has remained the most important prognostic factor. This article reviews the prognostic value of different proliferation assays in invasive breast cancer, and concludes that increased proliferation correlates strongly with poor prognosis, irrespective of the methodology used. Mitosis counting provides the most reproducible and independent prognostic value, and Ki67/MIB1 labelling and cyclin A index are promising alternatives that need methodological fine tuning.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Imaging of Cell Proliferation: Status and Prospects
Bading, J. R., & Shields, A. F. (2008) · Journal of Nuclear Medicine · doi:10.2967/jnumed.107.046391 · Cited by 320
Tellez, D., Balkenhol, M., Otte-Höller, I., van de Loo, R., Vogels, R., Bult, P., Wauters, C., Vreuls, W., Mol, S., Karssemeijer, N., et al. (2018) · IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging · doi:10.1109/tmi.2018.2820199 · Cited by 288
Dai, H., van't Veer, L., Lamb, J., He, Y. D., Mao, M., Fine, B. M., Bernards, R., van de Vijver, M., Deutsch, P., Sachs, A., et al. (2005) · Cancer Research · doi:10.1158/0008-5472.can-04-3953 · Cited by 257
Veta, M., van Diest, P. J., Jiwa, M., Al-Janabi, S., & Pluim, J. P. W. (2016) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0161286 · Cited by 127
Self-citationKim, J.-Y., Jeong, H. S., Chung, T., Kim, M., Lee, J. H., Jung, W. H., & Koo, J. S. (2017) · Oncotarget · doi:10.18632/oncotarget.17775 · Cited by 115
Metadata
- Authors
- van Diest, P. J., van der Wall, E., & Baak, J. P. A.
- Venue
- Journal of Clinical Pathology
- Publisher
- BMJ
- Published
- 2004-06-25
- Volume
- 57
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 675-681
- ISSN
- 0021-9746 (ISSN-L)
- 1472-4146
- OpenAlex
- W2169160999
- Cited by
- 385
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 7.71
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Prognostic value of proliferation in invasive breast cancer: a review: Table 1. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/jcp.2003.010777
- The paper
- van Diest, P. J., van der Wall, E., & Baak, J. P. A. (2004). Prognostic value of proliferation in invasive breast cancer: a review: Table 1. Journal of Clinical Pathology. https://doi.org/10.1136/jcp.2003.010777
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.