The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Multigene prognostic tests in breast cancer: past, present, future
Open accessAbstract
There is growing consensus that multigene prognostic tests provide useful complementary information to tumor size and grade in estrogen receptor (ER)-positive breast cancers. The tests primarily rely on quantification of ER and proliferation-related genes and combine these into multivariate prediction models. Since ER-negative cancers tend to have higher proliferation rates, the prognostic value of current multigene tests in these cancers is limited. First-generation prognostic signatures (Oncotype DX, MammaPrint, Genomic Grade Index) are substantially more accurate to predict recurrence within the first 5 years than in later years. This has become a limitation with the availability of effective extended adjuvant endocrine therapies. Newer tests (Prosigna, EndoPredict, Breast Cancer Index) appear to possess better prognostic value for late recurrences while also remaining predictive of early relapse. Some clinical prediction problems are more difficult to solve than others: there are no clinically useful prognostic signatures for ER-negative cancers, and drug-specific treatment response predictors also remain elusive. Emerging areas of research involve the development of immune gene signatures that carry modest but significant prognostic value independent of proliferation and ER status and represent candidate predictive markers for immune-targeted therapies. Overall metrics of tumor heterogeneity and genome integrity (for example, homologue recombination deficiency score) are emerging as potential new predictive markers for platinum agents. The recent expansion of high-throughput technology platforms including low-cost sequencing of circulating and tumor-derived DNA and RNA and rapid reliable quantification of microRNA offers new opportunities to build extended prediction models across multiplatform data.
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
Győrffy, B. (2021) · Computational and Structural Biotechnology Journal · doi:10.1016/j.csbj.2021.07.014 · Cited by 1,648
Self-citationAn overview of triple-negative breast cancer
Kumar, P., & Aggarwal, R. (2016) · Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics · doi:10.1007/s00404-015-3859-y · Cited by 771
Duffy, M. J., Harbeck, N., Nap, M., Molina, R., Nicolini, A., Senkus, E., & Cardoso, F. (2017) · European Journal of Cancer · doi:10.1016/j.ejca.2017.01.017 · Cited by 522
Menyhárt, O., & Győrffy, B. (2021) · Computational and Structural Biotechnology Journal · doi:10.1016/j.csbj.2021.01.009 · Cited by 380
Self-citationShen, Y., Kim, A. L., Du, R., & Liu, L. (2016) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0163054 · Cited by 24
Metadata
- Authors
- Győrffy, B., Hatzis, C., Sanft, T., Hofstatter, E., Aktas, B., & Pusztai, L.
- Venue
- Breast Cancer Research
- Published
- 2015-01-27
- Volume
- 17
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 11-11
- ISSN
- 1465-5411 (ISSN-L)
- 1465-542X
- OpenAlex
- W2070486022
- Cited by
- 257
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 11.87
- 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: Multigene prognostic tests in breast cancer: past, present, future. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1186/s13058-015-0514-2
- The paper
- Győrffy, B., Hatzis, C., Sanft, T., Hofstatter, E., Aktas, B., & Pusztai, L. (2015). Multigene prognostic tests in breast cancer: past, present, future. Breast Cancer Research. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13058-015-0514-2
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.