Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25980321›Full record

ArticleAnnals of surgical oncology2016

Differences in Response and Surgical Management with Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Invasive Lobular Versus Ductal Breast Cancer.

W Truin, G Vugts, R M H Roumen, A J G Maaskant-Braat, G A P Nieuwenhuijzen, M van der Heiden-van der Loo, V C G Tjan-Heijnen, A C Voogd

Open access · hybridAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of surgical oncology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

34 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 77 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

8 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

W TruinDepartment of Surgery, Máxima Medical Centre, Veldhoven, The Netherlands. wilfredtruin@hotmail.com.
G VugtsDepartment of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands.
R M H RoumenDepartment of Surgery, Máxima Medical Centre, Veldhoven, The Netherlands.
A J G Maaskant-BraatDepartment of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands.
G A P NieuwenhuijzenDepartment of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands.
M van der Heiden-van der LooDepartment of Research, Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organization IKNL, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
V C G Tjan-HeijnenDepartment of Medical Oncology, GROW-School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
A C VoogdDepartment of Research, Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organization IKNL, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Radboud University Nijmegen · NLNetherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation · NLCatharina Ziekenhuis · NLMaastricht University Medical Centre · NLMáxima Medisch Centrum · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis study was conducted to determine the impact of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) on the likelihood of breast-conserving surgery (BCS) performed for patients with invasive lobular breast carcinoma (ILC) and invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC).

methodsFemale patients with a diagnosis of ILC or IDC in The Netherlands between July 2008 and December 2012 were identified through the population-based Netherlands Cancer Registry.

resultsA total of 466 ILC patients received NAC compared with 3622 IDC patients. Downstaging by NAC was seen in 49.7 % of the patients with ILC and in 69.6 % of the patients with IDC, and a pathologic complete response (pCR) was observed in 4.9 and 20.2 % of these patients, respectively (P < 0.0001). Breast-conserving surgery was performed for 24.4 % of the patients with ILC receiving NAC versus 39.4 % of the patients with IDC. In the ILC group, 8.2 % of the patients needed surgical reinterventions after BCS due to tumor-positive resection margins compared with 3.4 % of the patients with IDC (P < 0.0001). Lobular histology was independently associated with a higher mastectomy rate (odds ratio 1.91; 95 % confidence interval 1.49-2.44). Among the patients with clinical T2 and T3 disease, BCS was achieved more often when NAC was administered in ILC as well as IDC.

conclusionThe patients with ILC receiving NAC were less likely to experience a pCR and less likely to undergo BCS than the patients with IDC. With regard to BCS, the impact of NAC for ILC patients was lower than for patients receiving surgery without NAC. However, despite the high number to treating in order to achieve BCS, a small subset of ILC patients, especially cT2 and cT3 patients, still may benefit from NAC.

Indexed as

Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsBiomarkers, TumorBreast NeoplasmsCarcinoma, Ductal, BreastCarcinoma, LobularCombined Modality TherapyErb-b2 Receptor Tyrosine KinasesFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansImmunoenzyme TechniquesLymphatic MetastasisMiddle AgedNeoplasm InvasivenessNeoplasm StagingPrognosisBiomarkers, TumorERBB2 protein, humanErb-b2 Receptor Tyrosine KinasesReceptors, EstrogenReceptors, Progesterone

Identifiers

PMID25980321
PMCPMC4695495
OpenAlexW1576629621

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.