Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26717149›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2015

Neoadjuvant Bevacizumab plus Chemotherapy versus Chemotherapy Alone to Treat Non-Metastatic Breast Cancer: A Meta-Analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials.

Li Cao, Guang-yu Yao, Min-feng Liu, Lu-jia Chen, Xiao-lei Hu, Chang-sheng Ye

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 25 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Emerging ways to treat breast cancer: will promises be met?Cellular oncology (Dordrecht, Netherlands) · 2018
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Li CaoBreast Center, Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong Province, China.
Guang-yu YaoBreast Center, Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong Province, China.
Min-feng LiuBreast Center, Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong Province, China.
Lu-jia ChenBreast Center, Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong Province, China.
Xiao-lei HuBreast Center, Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong Province, China.
Chang-sheng YeBreast Center, Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong Province, China.
Nanfang Hospital · CNSouthern Medical University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeResults from previous randomised controlled trials (RCTs) investigating whether the addition of bevacizumab to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) could statistically significantly increase the pathological complete response (pCR) and to identify which subgroup would benefit most from such regimens have produced conflicting results. This meta-analysis was designed to assess the efficacy and safety of bevacizumab plus chemotherapy compared with chemotherapy alone in the neoadjuvant setting.

methodsA literature search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, and the Cochrane library was performed to identify eligible studies. The primary endpoint of interest was pCR. The secondary endpoints were clinical complete rate (cCR), surgery rate, breast-conserving surgery (BCS) rate, and toxicity. The meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager software version 5.3.

resultsNine RCTs matched the selection criteria, yielding a total of 4967 patients (bevacizumab plus chemotherapy: 50.1%, chemotherapy alone: 49.9%). The results of this meta-analysis demonstrated that the addition of bevacizumab to NAC significantly increased the pCR rate (odds ratio [OR] = 1.34 [1.18-1.54]; P < 0.0001) compared with chemotherapy alone. Subgroup analysis showed that the effect of bevacizumab was more pronounced in patients with HER2-negative cancer (OR = 1.34 [1.17-1.54]; P < 0.0001) compared with HER2-positive cancer (OR = 1.69 [0.90-3.20]; P = 0.11). Similarly, in patients with HER2-negative cancer, the effect of bevacizumab was also more pronounced in patients with HR-negative cancer (OR = 1.38 [1.09-1.74]; P = 0.007) compared with HR-positive cancer (OR = 1.36 [0.78-2.35]; P = 0.27). No significant differences were observed between the groups with respect to cCR, surgery rate, or BCS rate. Additionally bevacizumab was associated with a higher incidence of neutropenia, febrile neutropenia, and hand-foot syndrome.

conclusionsHigher proportions of patients achieved pCR when bevacizumab was added to NAC compared with when they received chemotherapy alone; acceptable toxicities were also found. Subgroup analysis demonstrated that patients with histologically confirmed HER2-negative and HR-negative breast cancer benefited the most.

Indexed as

Antibodies, Monoclonal, HumanizedAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsBevacizumabBreast NeoplasmsClinical Trials, Phase II as TopicClinical Trials, Phase III as TopicDisease-Free SurvivalErb-b2 Receptor Tyrosine KinasesFemaleHumansMastectomy, SegmentalNeoadjuvant TherapyRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicAntibodies, Monoclonal, HumanizedBevacizumabErb-b2 Receptor Tyrosine Kinases

Identifiers

PMID26717149
PMCPMC4699216
OpenAlexW2216283397

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.