Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,003

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Breast cancer prognostic classification in the molecular era: the role of histological grade

Open access
Rakha, Emad A, Reis-Filho, Jorge S, Baehner, Frederick, Dabbs, David J, Decker, Thomas, Eusebi, Vincenzo, Fox, Stephen B, Ichihara, Shu, Jacquemier, Jocelyne, Lakhani, Sunil R, Palacios, José, Richardson, Andrea L, Schnitt, Stuart J, Schmitt, Fernando C, Tan, Puay-Hoon, Tse, Gary M, Badve, Sunil, Ellis, Ian O·2010·Breast Cancer Research

Abstract

Breast cancer is a heterogeneous disease with varied morphological appearances, molecular features, behavior, and response to therapy. Current routine clinical management of breast cancer relies on the availability of robust clinical and pathological prognostic and predictive factors to support clinical and patient decision making in which potentially suitable treatment options are increasingly available. One of the best-established prognostic factors in breast cancer is histological grade, which represents the morphological assessment of tumor biological characteristics and has been shown to be able to generate important information related to the clinical behavior of breast cancers. Genome-wide microarray-based expression profiling studies have unraveled several characteristics of breast cancer biology and have provided further evidence that the biological features captured by histological grade are important in determining tumor behavior. Also, expression profiling studies have generated clinically useful data that have significantly improved our understanding of the biology of breast cancer, and these studies are undergoing evaluation as improved prognostic and predictive tools in clinical practice. Clinical acceptance of these molecular assays will require them to be more than expensive surrogates of established traditional factors such as histological grade. It is essential that they provide additional prognostic or predictive information above and beyond that offered by current parameters. Here, we present an analysis of the validity of histological grade as a prognostic factor and a consensus view on the significance of histological grade and its role in breast cancer classification and staging systems in this era of emerging clinical use of molecular classifiers.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1186/bcr2607

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

See all 1,003

Metadata

Authors
Rakha, E. A., Reis-Filho, J. S., Baehner, F., Dabbs, D. J., Decker, T., Eusebi, V., Fox, S. B., Ichihara, S., Jacquemier, J., Lakhani, S. R., Palacios, J., Richardson, A. L., Schnitt, S. J., Schmitt, F. C., Tan, P.-H., Tse, G. M., Badve, S., & Ellis, I. O.
Venue
Breast Cancer Research
Published
2010-07-30
Volume
12
Issue
4
Pages
207-207
ISSN
  • 1465-5411 (ISSN-L)
  • 1465-542X
OpenAlex
W2128920415
Cited by
1,003
References
0
FWCI
8.31
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

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: Breast cancer prognostic classification in the molecular era: the role of histological grade. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1186/bcr2607
The paper
Rakha, E. A., Reis-Filho, J. S., Baehner, F., Dabbs, D. J., Decker, T., Eusebi, V., Fox, S. B., Ichihara, S., Jacquemier, J., Lakhani, S. R., Palacios, J., Richardson, A. L., Schnitt, S. J., Schmitt, F. C., Tan, P.-H., Tse, G. M., Badve, S., & Ellis, I. O. (2010). Breast cancer prognostic classification in the molecular era: the role of histological grade. Breast Cancer Research. https://doi.org/10.1186/bcr2607

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.