Evidence map›Paper›PMID 12692616›Full record

ReviewBone marrow transplantation2003

Should we continue to study high-dose chemotherapy in metastatic breast cancer patients? A critical review of the published data.

A Tartarone, G Romano, R Galasso, G Iodice, G D'Arena, M Coccaro, A Bochicchio, A Sgambato, N Di Renzo

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Bone marrow transplantation, 2003. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
2.8field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. 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

9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

A TartaroneCentro di Riferimento Oncologico della Basilicata, Rionero in Vulture (PZ), Italy.
G Romano
R Galasso
G Iodice
G D'Arena
M Coccaro
A Bochicchio
A Sgambato
N Di Renzo
Centro di Riferimento Oncologico della Basilicata · ITOspedale Pediatrico Giovanni XXIII · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Data from eight randomised trials on high-dose chemotherapy (HDC) for metastatic breast cancer (MBC) have been published, but only seven studies are evaluable after the Bezwoda trial was discredited. Moreover, overall survival (OS) has been evaluated in only four out of seven studies since three had a crossover design. OS was similar for the HDC and standard-dose chemotherapy (SDC) group in the four evaluable trials, while disease-free survival (DFS) was improved in the HDC group in six of the seven trials. The delay in relapse for patients with metastatic disease represents an important clinical outcome; furthermore, since none of the reported studies randomised more than 220 patients, their statistical power may have been too limited to detect meaningful survival differences. Finally, preliminary experiences have shown that HDC seems to be the ideal platform upon which to build novel therapies. In conclusion, HDC remains an important field of clinical research for breast cancer patients with stage IV disease and, from the studies reported in this article, there is some evidence for offering this therapeutic modality to selected patients who are interested in a medically aggressive approach.

Indexed as

Antineoplastic AgentsBreast NeoplasmsFemaleHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicAntineoplastic Agents

Identifiers

PMID12692616
OpenAlexW1971348759

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.