SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2003
High dose chemotherapy and autologous bone marrow or stem cell transplantation versus conventional chemotherapy for women with metastatic breast cancer.
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 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Ethical issues in autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) in advanced breast cancer: a systematic literature review.BMC medical ethics · 2011Pooled it
- Impact of high-dose chemotherapy on the ability to deliver subsequent local-regional radiotherapy for breast cancer: analysis of Cancer and Leukemia Group B Protocol 9082.International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics · 2010Trial
- Pegase 03: a prospective randomized phase III trial of FEC with or without high-dose thiotepa, cyclophosphamide and autologous stem cell transplantation in first-line treatment of metastatic breast cancer.Bone marrow transplantation · 2008Trial
- Article
- Clinical endpoints in oncology - a primer.American journal of cancer research · 2021Review
- Treating Metastatic Brain Cancers With Stem Cells.Frontiers in molecular neuroscience · 2021Review
- Estimating within-study covariances in multivariate meta-analysis with multiple outcomes.Statistics in medicine · 2013Article
- High-dose chemotherapy with autologous hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation in metastatic breast cancer: overview of six randomized trials.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2011Article
- Biological purging of breast cancer cell lines using a replication-competent oncolytic virus in human stem cell autografts.Bone marrow transplantation · 2005Article
- Failure of anti-infective mouth rinses and concomitant antibiotic prophylaxis to decrease oral mucosal colonization in autologous stem cell transplantation.Bone marrow transplantation · 2005Article
- Stem-cell transplantation for the treatment of advanced solid tumors.Springer seminars in immunopathology · 2004Review
- Stomatitis-related pain in women with breast cancer undergoing autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplant.Cancer nursingArticle
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThere is a hypothesis that high dose chemotherapy with autologous bone marrow or stem cell transplantation (autograft) may improve survival for women with metastatic breast cancer.
objectivesTo compare the effectiveness of high dose chemotherapy and autologous bone marrow or stem cell transplantation with conventional chemotherapy for women with metastatic breast cancer. SEARCH STRATEGY: We used the Cochrane Breast Cancer Group search strategy, adding these terms: bone marrow transplantation, stem cell transplantation, autologous stem cell support. The following databases were searched: MEDLINE (until August 2002), EMBASE (until July 2002), ASCO (American Society of Clinical Oncology) (1995-2002) and the COCHRANE LIBRARY (Issue 3 2002). We searched the Cochrane Breast Cancer Group database and cooperative research groups' websites for unpublished trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials comparing the effectiveness of high dose chemotherapy and autograft with conventional chemotherapy for women with metastatic breast cancer. Studies included one or more of the following outcomes: treatment related mortality, overall or progression-free survival at 1, 2, 3, 5 or 7 years, morbidity, quality of life measures, time to tumour progression, overall survival time. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Five randomised controlled trials met the inclusion criteria. Two independent reviewers extracted data. MAIN
resultsIn total 382 women were randomised to receive high dose chemotherapy with autograft and 358 were randomised to receive conventional treatment. There were ten treatment related deaths among the high dose group and none reported in the control (conventional dose) group (RR 5.70, 95%CI (1.30, 25)). There was no statistically significant difference in overall survival between the high dose and control groups (at one year: RR 0.99, 95% CI (0.91, 1.08); three years: RR 1.16 95% CI (0.90, 1.51); five years: RR 1.28, 95% CI (0.72, 2.27)). At one and two years of follow up, a statistically significant difference in progression free survival was reported, favouring the high dose group (one year: RR 1.81, 95% CI (1.39,2.34); two years: RR 1.96, 95% CI (1.32, 2.90 ). However this difference was not evident at three or five years (three years: RR 1.44, 95% CI (0.85, 2.44); five years: RR 1.21, 95% CI (0.40, 3.69). Toxicity was more severe in the high dose group. None of the trials has completed follow up and further data are awaited. REVIEWER'S
conclusionsAlthough there is evidence that high dose chemotherapy and autograft improves progression free survival at one and two years' follow up compared to conventional chemotherapy, there is no evidence of benefit in overall survival.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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 OpenQuestion graph.