SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2005
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, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 79 citations in OpenAlex.
- Assessment of effectiveness of percutaneous adhesiolysis in managing chronic low back pain secondary to lumbar central spinal canal stenosis.International journal of medical sciences · 2013Trial
- Combination chemotherapy with cyclophosphamide, epirubicin and 5-fluorouracil causes trabecular bone loss, bone marrow cell depletion and marrow adiposity in female rats.Journal of bone and mineral metabolism · 2016Article
- Human placenta mesenchymal stem cells expressing exogenous kringle1-5 protein by fiber-modified adenovirus suppress angiogenesis.Cancer gene therapy · 2014Article
- Genetic heterogeneity in breast cancer: the road to personalized medicine?BMC medicine · 2013Review
- Interdisciplinary GoR level III Guidelines for the Diagnosis, Therapy and Follow-up Care of Breast Cancer: Short version - AWMF Registry No.: 032-045OL AWMF-Register-Nummer: 032-045OL - Kurzversion 3.0, Juli 2012.Geburtshilfe und Frauenheilkunde · 2013Article
- Abandonment of high-dose chemotherapy/hematopoietic cell transplants for breast cancer following negative trial results.Health services research · 2011Article
- 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
- Treatment strategy for metastatic breast cancer according to intrinsic subtype.International journal of clinical oncology · 2010Article
- International guidelines for management of metastatic breast cancer: can metastatic breast cancer be cured?Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2010Review
- Clinical research methodology I: introduction to randomized trials.Journal of the American College of Surgeons · 2008Review
- Development of a Universal Electric Medical Clamp for Rotational Intraperitoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy.In vivo (Athens, Greece)Article
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThere is a hypothesis that high dose chemotherapy with autologous bone marrow or peripheral 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 November 2004), EMBASE (until November 2004), ASCO (American Society of Clinical Oncology) (1995-2004) and the COCHRANE LIBRARY (Issue 4 2004). 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: Six randomised controlled trials met the inclusion criteria. Two independent reviewers extracted data. MAIN
resultsIn total 438 eligible women were randomised to receive high dose chemotherapy with autograft and 412 were randomised to receive conventional treatment. There were fifteen treatment-related deaths among the high dose group and two in the control (conventional dose) group (RR 4.07 (95% CI 1.39, 11.88)). There was no statistically significant difference in overall survival between the high dose and control groups at one year, three years or five years. At one and five years of follow up, there was a statistically significant difference in event-free survival, favouring the high dose group (one year: RR 1.76 (95% CI 1.40, 2.21); five years: RR 2.84 (95% CI 1.07, 7.50). Toxicity was more severe in the high dose group. Only one of the trials has followed up all women for five years and further data are awaited. AUTHORS'
conclusionsAlthough there is statistically significant evidence that high dose chemotherapy and autograft improves event free survival compared to conventional chemotherapy, there is no statistically significant evidence of benefit in overall survival for women with metastatic breast cancer. High dose chemotherapy with bone marrow or stem cell transplantation should not be given to women with metastatic breast cancer outside of clinical trials.
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.