Reply to A.-S. Dieudonné et al and J.M. Rae et al.

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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

1. Addressing Adherence Using Genotype-Specific PBPK Modeling-Impact of Drug Holidays on Tamoxifen and Endoxifen Plasma Levels.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2017
   Article
2. Prediction of tamoxifen outcome by genetic variation of CYP2D6 in post-menopausal women with early breast cancer.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2014
   Article
3. Concomitant use of tamoxifen and endoxifen in postmenopausal early breast cancer: prediction of plasma levels by physiologically-based pharmacokinetic modeling.SpringerPlus · 2014
   Article

Corrections and comments

• Comment on
  Tamoxifen use in postmenopausal breast cancer: CYP2D6 matters.2013
• Comment on
  Why should results from metastatic trials no longer matter for early-stage disease?2013
• Comment on
  CYP2D6 genotype should not be used for deciding about tamoxifen therapy in postmenopausal breast cancer.2013

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Funding

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as