Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 419

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Relative worth of estrogen or progesterone receptor and pathologic characteristics of differentiation as indicators of prognosis in node negative breast cancer patients: findings from National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project Protocol B-06.

Fisher, B, Redmond, C, Fisher, E R, Caplan, R·1988·Journal of Clinical Oncology

Abstract

This study correlates the disease-free survival (DFS), distant disease-free survival (DDFS), and survival (S) of 1,157 histologically node negative breast cancer patients with the estrogen and/or progesterone receptor (ER, PR) and with the nuclear or histologic grade (NG, HG) of their tumors. All were treated by operation without systemic adjuvant therapy. The DFS, DDFS, and S were significantly greater (P = .005, .004, less than .001) in patients with ER positive than ER negative tumors but the magnitude of the differences after 5 years of follow-up was slight (8% in both DFS and DDFS and 10% in S). Differences of that magnitude are insufficient to discriminate clearly between patients who should or should not receive systemic therapy. As with ER, there were outcome differences in favor of PR positive tumors but only in S was the difference significant (8% at 5 years; P = .002). When combined with ER, PR made no independent contribution in the outcome prediction. Regression analysis indicated that NG was the most important single marker of outcome. The prognosis of women with unknown ER or PR was equivalent to or better than that in those with ER or PR positive tumors. This finding seems to be related to tumor size in that a higher proportion of tumors with unknown receptors were less than 1.0 cm, thus having insufficient tissue for analysis. Our findings disclose that in node negative breast cancer patients, NG is a better marker of prognosis than is tumor ER, and that PR is of little or no value. Tumor NG may also be useful for selecting the type of systemic therapy to be used in these patients.

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 · 10.1200/jco.1988.6.7.1076

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 419

Metadata

Authors
Fisher, B., Redmond, C., Fisher, E. R., & Caplan, R.
Venue
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Published
1988-07
Volume
6
Issue
7
Pages
1076-1087
ISSN
  • 0732-183X (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-7755
OpenAlex
W1924240366
Cited by
419
References
0
FWCI
12.61
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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: Relative worth of estrogen or progesterone receptor and pathologic characteristics of differentiation as indicators of prognosis in node negative breast cancer patients: findings from National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project Protocol B-06. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1200/jco.1988.6.7.1076
The paper
Fisher, B., Redmond, C., Fisher, E. R., & Caplan, R. (1988). Relative worth of estrogen or progesterone receptor and pathologic characteristics of differentiation as indicators of prognosis in node negative breast cancer patients: findings from National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project Protocol B-06. Journal of Clinical Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.1988.6.7.1076

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.