Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40397321›Full record

ArticleBreast cancer research and treatment2025

Invasive lobular breast carcinoma variants; clinicopathological features and patient outcomes.

Aysegul Aktas, Meryem Gunay Gurleyik, Dogukan Akkus, Zekeriya Ucur, Fugen Aker

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Breast cancer research and treatment, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07613151 (NAPOLI), which is not on this map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT07613151 recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2026, after this paper: background citation

NAPOLI: Negative/Low Hormone Receptor and APOcrine Lobular Invasive Breast Carcinoma - A Real-World International Cohort Study

TypeobservationalSponsorIstituto Oncologico Veneto IRCCSRan2026 to 2027Enrolled250ConditionsLobular Breast CarcinomaArmsUpfront Breast Surgery, Adjuvant Radiotherapy, Endocrine Therapy, Chemotherapy
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Aysegul AktasGeneral Surgery, Haydarpasa Numune Training and Research Hospital, University of Health Sciences Turkiye, SBU Haydarpasa Numune Egitim Ve Arastırma Hastanesi, Selimiye, Tibbiye Caddesi, No:23, 34668, Uskudar, Istanbul, Turkey. draysegulaktas@gmail.com.
Meryem Gunay GurleyikGeneral Surgery, Haydarpasa Numune Training and Research Hospital, University of Health Sciences Turkiye, SBU Haydarpasa Numune Egitim Ve Arastırma Hastanesi, Selimiye, Tibbiye Caddesi, No:23, 34668, Uskudar, Istanbul, Turkey.
Dogukan AkkusGeneral Surgery, Haydarpasa Numune Training and Research Hospital, University of Health Sciences Turkiye, SBU Haydarpasa Numune Egitim Ve Arastırma Hastanesi, Selimiye, Tibbiye Caddesi, No:23, 34668, Uskudar, Istanbul, Turkey.
Zekeriya UcurGeneral Surgery, Haydarpasa Numune Training and Research Hospital, University of Health Sciences Turkiye, SBU Haydarpasa Numune Egitim Ve Arastırma Hastanesi, Selimiye, Tibbiye Caddesi, No:23, 34668, Uskudar, Istanbul, Turkey.
Fugen AkerPathology,, Haydarpasa Numune Training and Research Hospital, University of Health Sciences Turkiye, Istanbul, Turkey.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionAn understanding of the differences among the invasive lobular breast carcinoma (ILC) variants is crucial for risk stratification, and tailored treatment planning. This article compares variants of ILC according to their clinical outcomes and histopathological features. PATIENTS AND

methodsPatients diagnosed with ILC between January 2010 and August 2021 were retrospectively evaluated. Patients were divided into three groups; 1: classic ILC (cILC); 2: pleomorphic lobular carcinoma (PLC); 3: mixed ILC. Mixed ILC was divided into three subgroups: 3a, cILC + PLC; 3b, cILC + mixed; 3c, PLC + mixed.

resultsA total of 254 patients were included in the study. Median overall survival (OS) was 48 months, and median disease-free survival (DFS) was 46 months. Locoregional recurrence (LRR) occurred in 15 (5.9%) of the patients, and distant metastasis (DM) developed in 23 (9.1%). Death occurred in 16 (6.3%) patients. There was no significant difference in LRR rate among groups. When considering five groups (Groups 1, 2, 3a, 3b, and 3c), the median OS was 62.5, 52.0, 50.8, 56.7, and 41.5 months, respectively, while the median DFS was 60.3, 46.6, 46.7, 54.5, and 39.6 months, respectively. Notably, the PLC + mixed group without a classic variant (Group 3c) exhibited even worse outcomes than pure PLC.

conclusionsIn this study, pure cILC exhibited the best prognostic features among the ILC variants. Furthermore, we observed a higher mastectomy rate in patients with pleomorphic variants. Surgical management of ILC remains controversial. Moreover, comprehensive randomized controlled trials are essential to establish standardized treatment protocols for ILC patients.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsCarcinoma, LobularAdultAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansMastectomyMiddle AgedNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalPrognosisRetrospective StudiesBreast cancerClassic variantInvasive lobular breast carcinomaPleomorphic lobular carcinomaSurgerySurvival

Identifiers

PMID40397321
PMCPMC12133914

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.