Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26412227›Full record

ReviewCurrent oncology reports2015

Treatment of Breast Cancer in the Elderly.

Rachel A Freedman

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current oncology reports, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Acute toxicity and tolerability of anthracycline-based chemotherapy regimens in older versus younger patients with breast cancer: real-world data.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2021
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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

1 author.

Rachel A FreedmanDana-Farber Cancer Institute, 450 Brookline Avenue, Boston, MA, 02215, USA. rafreedman@partners.org.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Despite the fact that the US population is aging and the numbers of older patients with breast cancer are increasing, many questions remain on how to optimally treat this patient population. Accrual of older cancer patients to clinical trials has been stagnant, and consequently, evidence-based recommendations are often limited by a lack of prospective data to inform decisions. Increasingly, one's functional status has been recognized as a critical factor in predicting for treatment toxicity, and tools such as the geriatric assessment will likely become a routine part of clinical practice over time. Here, adjuvant treatment considerations for older patients will be reviewed, including what is known about treatment efficacy, utilization patterns, and toxicity for older breast cancer patients. Improving enrollment of older patients onto clinical trials should be a national priority; it is only through prospective assessment that we can improve our approaches to treating our older patients with cancer.

Indexed as

Chemotherapy, AdjuvantRadiotherapy, AdjuvantAgedAged, 80 and overAge FactorsAgingAntineoplastic Agents, HormonalBreast NeoplasmsCombined Modality TherapyEvidence-Based PracticeFemaleGeriatric AssessmentHumansPractice Guidelines as TopicProspective StudiesQuality of LifeAntineoplastic Agents, HormonalAdjuvant treatmentBreast cancerElderlyOlder

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.