Delving into female breast cancer: Distinct disease-specific survival outcomes between invasive lobular and ductal carcinomas revealed by propensity score matching.

IF 2.6 3区综合性期刊 Q1 MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES

PLoS ONE Pub Date : 2024-12-23 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0300116

Wu Zhang, Yuquan Huang, Ye Zhou, Jiaojiao Xue, Shan Gao, Lin Kang, Jian Shi, Tao Zhou, Yalong Duan, Sihan Guo, Qingxia Li

{"title":"Delving into female breast cancer: Distinct disease-specific survival outcomes between invasive lobular and ductal carcinomas revealed by propensity score matching.","authors":"Wu Zhang, Yuquan Huang, Ye Zhou, Jiaojiao Xue, Shan Gao, Lin Kang, Jian Shi, Tao Zhou, Yalong Duan, Sihan Guo, Qingxia Li","doi":"10.1371/journal.pone.0300116","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose: The difference in prognosis between invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC) and invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC) is still controversial in the academic community. Resolving this controversy can help to more accurately determine patients' prognosis, provide further personalized treatment, alleviate unnecessary psychological burden for some patients, and provide direction for further fundamental research.Patients and methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted using the SEER Research Plus Data 8 Registries, Nov 2021 sub (1978-2019), including female breast cancer patients diagnosed with ILC or IDC between 2010 and 2015. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses were performed, and key covariates affecting prognosis were selected. Propensity score matching (PSM) was employed to match patients, and balance tests were conducted to evaluate covariate distribution. Disease-specific survival (DSS) differences between the matched IDC and ILC groups were compared.Results: Following PSM, the covariate differences between the IDC and ILC groups were significantly reduced. The survival analysis revealed a significantly better prognosis for the IDC group than the ILC group (Log-rank test p < 0.001), with a 28.0% increased risk observed in the ILC group.Conclusion: This study provides evidence supporting the existence of significant differences in prognosis between IDC and ILC patients after rigorous matching. The IDC group displayed a significantly better prognosis than the ILC group. Notably, these findings have implications for personalized treatment in clinical practice and contribute to the ongoing academic debate on survival differences between IDC and ILC. However, further research is needed to investigate the biological mechanisms, gene expression, and signaling pathway disparities between IDC and ILC, aiming to provide more targeted guidance for clinical decision-making.","PeriodicalId":20189,"journal":{"name":"PLoS ONE","volume":"19 12","pages":"e0300116"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11665987/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PLoS ONE","FirstCategoryId":"103","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0300116","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"综合性期刊","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: The difference in prognosis between invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC) and invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC) is still controversial in the academic community. Resolving this controversy can help to more accurately determine patients' prognosis, provide further personalized treatment, alleviate unnecessary psychological burden for some patients, and provide direction for further fundamental research.

Patients and methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted using the SEER Research Plus Data 8 Registries, Nov 2021 sub (1978-2019), including female breast cancer patients diagnosed with ILC or IDC between 2010 and 2015. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses were performed, and key covariates affecting prognosis were selected. Propensity score matching (PSM) was employed to match patients, and balance tests were conducted to evaluate covariate distribution. Disease-specific survival (DSS) differences between the matched IDC and ILC groups were compared.

Results: Following PSM, the covariate differences between the IDC and ILC groups were significantly reduced. The survival analysis revealed a significantly better prognosis for the IDC group than the ILC group (Log-rank test p < 0.001), with a 28.0% increased risk observed in the ILC group.

Conclusion: This study provides evidence supporting the existence of significant differences in prognosis between IDC and ILC patients after rigorous matching. The IDC group displayed a significantly better prognosis than the ILC group. Notably, these findings have implications for personalized treatment in clinical practice and contribute to the ongoing academic debate on survival differences between IDC and ILC. However, further research is needed to investigate the biological mechanisms, gene expression, and signaling pathway disparities between IDC and ILC, aiming to provide more targeted guidance for clinical decision-making.

Abstract Image

查看原文本刊更多论文

深入研究女性乳腺癌：倾向评分匹配揭示了浸润性小叶癌和导管癌之间不同的疾病特异性生存结果。

目的：浸润性小叶癌（ILC）与浸润性导管癌（IDC）的预后差异在学术界仍存在争议。解决这一争议有助于更准确地判断患者预后，提供进一步的个性化治疗，减轻部分患者不必要的心理负担，并为进一步的基础研究提供方向。患者和方法：采用SEER Research Plus Data 8 registres，于2021年11月（1978-2019）进行了一项回顾性队列研究，包括2010年至2015年间诊断为ILC或IDC的女性乳腺癌患者。进行单因素和多因素Cox回归分析，选择影响预后的关键协变量。采用倾向评分匹配（PSM）对患者进行匹配，并用平衡检验评估协变量分布。比较匹配的IDC组和ILC组之间的疾病特异性生存（DSS）差异。结果：经PSM治疗后，IDC组与ILC组间的协变量差异显著减小。生存分析显示，IDC组的预后明显优于ILC组（Log-rank检验p < 0.001）， ILC组的风险增加28.0%。结论：本研究支持IDC与ILC患者经过严格匹配后预后存在显著差异。IDC组预后明显优于ILC组。值得注意的是，这些发现对临床实践中的个性化治疗具有重要意义，并有助于对IDC和ILC之间生存差异的持续学术争论。然而，IDC与ILC的生物学机制、基因表达、信号通路差异等方面的研究仍需进一步深入，为临床决策提供更有针对性的指导。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

PLoS ONE 生物-生物学

CiteScore

6.20

自引率

5.40%

发文量

14242

审稿时长

3.7 months

期刊介绍： PLOS ONE is an international, peer-reviewed, open-access, online publication. PLOS ONE welcomes reports on primary research from any scientific discipline. It provides: * Open-access—freely accessible online, authors retain copyright * Fast publication times * Peer review by expert, practicing researchers * Post-publication tools to indicate quality and impact * Community-based dialogue on articles * Worldwide media coverage