Evidence map›Paper›PMID 12535457›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2003

High dose chemotherapy and autologous bone marrow or stem cell transplantation versus conventional chemotherapy for women with early poor prognosis breast cancer.

C Farquhar, R Basser, J Marjoribanks, A Lethaby

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2003. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Oligometastatic breast cancer: A mini review.Indian journal of medical and paediatric oncology : official journal of Indian Society of Medical & Paediatric Oncology · 2014
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.

C FarquharObstetrics and Gynaecology, Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility, National Womens Hospital, Claude Rd, Epsom, Auckland, New Zealand. c.farquhar@auckland.ac.nz
R Basser
J Marjoribanks
A Lethaby
Women's Hospital · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOverall survival rates are disappointing for women with early poor prognosis breast cancer. There is a hypothesis that high dose chemotherapy with autologous bone marrow or stem cell transplant (autograft) may improve survival rates by permitting higher doses of adjuvant chemotherapy to be given.

objectivesTo compare the effectiveness of high dose chemotherapy and autograft versus conventional chemotherapy for women with early poor prognosis breast cancer. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Breast Cancer Group specialised register, The Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (Cochrane Library Issue 3, 2002), MEDLINE (1966 to Aug. 2002), EMBASE (1980 to Aug. 2002), PsycINFO (1984 to Aug. 2002), Cinahl (1982 to July 2002), the websites of co-operative research groups and ASCO (American Society of Clinical Oncologists) and reference lists of articles found. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials comparing the effectiveness of high dose chemotherapy and autograft versus conventional chemotherapy for women with early poor prognosis breast cancer. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We identified nine trials that met the inclusion criteria. Three independent reviewers extracted data. MAIN

resultsIn total 1758 women were randomised to receive high dose chemotherapy with autograft and 1767 women were randomised to receive conventional chemotherapy. There were 48 non cancer-related deaths on the high dose arm and four on the conventional dose arm (RR 7.74, 95% CI (3.43, 17.50). Since many studies have not completed follow-up, overall survival rates were in most cases based on results to date. There was no statistically significant difference in overall survival between women who received high dose chemotherapy with autograft and women who received conventional chemotherapy, either at three years (RR 1.02, 95% CI (0.98, 1.06)), or at five years (RR 0.98, 95% CI (0.93, 1.05)). There was a statistically significant benefit in event-free survival at three years for the group who received high dose chemotherapy (RR 1.11, 95% CI (1.05, 1.18)). However at five years there was no statistically significant difference between the groups (RR 1.00, 95% CI (0.92, 1.08)). Side-effects were more common and more severe in the high dose group though most were reversible. Women in the high dose group reported significantly worse quality of life scores immediately after treatment but at one year there was no statistically significant difference between the groups in quality of life scores. REVIEWER'S

conclusionsThere is insufficient evidence to support the routine use of high dose chemotherapy with autograft for women with early poor prognosis breast cancer.

Indexed as

Bone Marrow TransplantationStem Cell TransplantationAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsBreast NeoplasmsCombined Modality TherapyFemaleHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSurvival RateTransplantation, Autologous

Identifiers

PMID12535457
OpenAlexW4249029247

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 OpenQuestion graph.