ArticleMedical oncology (Northwood, London, England)2014
Neoadjuvant chemotherapy for different molecular breast cancer subtypes: a retrospective study in Russian population.
Article in Medical oncology (Northwood, London, England), 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Predictive value of vascular endothelial growth factor receptor type 2 in triple-negative breast cancer patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy.Molecular and cellular biochemistry · 2018Trial
- The development of molecular typing in canine mammary carcinomas.Molecular biology reports · 2022Review
- Multiparametric MRI-based radiomics analysis for prediction of breast cancers insensitive to neoadjuvant chemotherapy.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2020Article
- Predictors of Pathological Complete Response to Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Iranian Breast Cancer PatientsAsian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of this retrospective study was to evaluate the objective clinical response (cOR), pathological complete response (pCR), and progression-free survival (PFS) in 231 Russian patients with four subtypes of breast cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy. About 130 (56.3 %) patients received anthracycline-based, 56 (24.2 %) capecitabine-containing (CAX), 28 (12.1 %) taxotere and 17 (7.4 %) non-anthracycline-containing chemotherapy regimens at the Tomsk Cancer Research Institute between 2000 and 2010. Tumors were subtyped according to the hormone receptor (HR) and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) immunohistochemical data. The majority of tumors (48.9 %) were ER+/PR+ and HER2-negative (HR+/HER2-), 10.4 % were ER+ PR+ and HER2-positive (HR+/HER2+), 9.1 % were ER-/PR- and HER2-overexpressed (HER2-enriched) and 31.6 % were ER-/PR- and HER2-negative (triple negative). Both cOR and pCR were significantly higher in the triple-negative tumors compared to the other subtypes (P = 0.021 and P = 0.033, respectively). Among the four chemotherapy regimens, only CAX regimen had a predictive value for cOR (HR 2.30, 95 % CI 1.16-4.58, P = 0.009). Multivariate regression analysis showed that the triple-negative subtype (HR 2.54, 95 % CI 1.06-1.42, P = 0.011) and CAX regimen (HR 3.01, 95 % CI 1.01-1.46, P = 0.002) were significantly associated with cOR. No association between patient's PFS and a tumor subtype was observed. However, there was a trend for a prolonged PFS among patients with cOR (P = 0.056). Our data indicate a potentially better prognosis for triple-negative breast cancer patients if treated with the CAX neoadjuvant regimen.
Indexed as
Identifiers
25139196What 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.