ArticleInternational journal of clinical and experimental pathology2015
Evaluation of biomarker changes after administration of various neoadjuvant chemotherapies in breast cancer.
Article in International journal of clinical and experimental pathology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Molecular shifts in breast cancer following neoadjuvant chemotherapy: a prospective study and review of literature.Future oncology (London, England) · 2025Review
- The Significance of MET Expression and Strategies of Targeting MET Treatment in Advanced Gastric Cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2021Article
- Effect of neoadjuvant therapy on breast cancer biomarker profile.BMC cancer · 2020Article
- Metastatic Heterogeneity of Breast Cancer: Companion and Theranostic Approach in Nuclear Medicine.Cancers · 2020Review
- Predictors of Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy Response in Breast Cancer: A Review.OncoTargets and therapy · 2020Review
- Electrochemotherapy induces tumor regression and decreases the proliferative index in canine cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma.Scientific reports · 2019Article
- Discordance in Immunohistochemical Status of Breast Cancer Post Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy.Indian journal of surgical oncology · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To assess the changes in estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) and Ki-67 expression in breast cancer patients after various neoadjuvant chemotherapies. Data from 138 locally advanced breast cancer patients with histological diagnoses were reviewed. Seventy patients (group 1) were given 4 cycles of 500 mg/m(2) cyclophosphamide and 50 mg/m(2) pirarubicin every 21 days. Sixty-eight patients (group 2) were given 4 cycles of 500 mg/m(2) cyclophosphamide and 75 mg/m(2) docetaxel every 21 days. The biomarker changes of the operated tumor tissues were compared with the initial core biopsies. ER, PR, HER2 and Ki-67 expression changed by 28.6%, 22.9%, 17.1% and 54.3%, respectively, after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in group 1 and 16.2%, 22.1%, 13.2% and 70.6%, respectively, after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in group 2. There were significant differences between the groups regarding ER and Ki-67 status changes, and these changes can be used to inform treatment strategies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
25755795PMC4348938W2394759220What 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.