ReviewNature reviews. Clinical oncology2016
Biomarkers of residual disease after neoadjuvant therapy for breast cancer.
Review in Nature reviews. Clinical oncology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
34 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 57 citations in OpenAlex.
- Guideline
- Evaluating the prognostic significance of HIST1H4C in breast cancer: implications for neoadjuvant therapy.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Validating the predictions of mathematical models describing tumor growth and treatment response.ArXiv · 2025Article
- Metabolomics assisted by transcriptomics analysis to reveal metabolic characteristics and potential biomarkers associated with treatment response of neoadjuvant therapy with TCbHP regimen in HER2 + breast cancer.Breast cancer research : BCR · 2024Article
- SAMHD1 expression is a surrogate marker of immune infiltration and determines prognosis after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in early breast cancer.Cellular oncology (Dordrecht, Netherlands) · 2024Article
- A global sensitivity analysis of a mechanistic model of neoadjuvant chemotherapy for triple negative breast cancer constrained by in vitro and in vivo imaging data.Engineering with computers · 2024Article
- Zinc-finger protein 382 antagonises CDC25A and ZEB1 signaling pathway in breast cancer.Genes & diseases · 2023Article
- Spatial metabolomics for evaluating response to neoadjuvant therapy in non-small cell lung cancer patients.Cancer communications (London, England) · 2022Article
- Predictive factors of neoadjuvant immune checkpoint blockade in melanoma.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2022Review
- Multi-staged gene expression profiling reveals potential genes and the critical pathways in kidney cancer.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Tumor-promoting mechanisms of macrophage-derived extracellular vesicles-enclosed microRNA-660 in breast cancer progression.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2022Article
- Current management of melanoma patients with nodal metastases.Clinical & experimental metastasis · 2022Review
- Long noncoding RNACell adhesion & migration · 2021Article
- Impact of immunohistochemical profile changes following neoadjuvant therapy in the treatment of breast cancer.Ecancermedicalscience · 2021Article
- Circulating Neuroendocrine Gene Transcripts (NETest): A Postoperative Strategy for Early Identification of the Efficacy of Radical Surgery for Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors.Annals of surgical oncology · 2020Article
- FZR1 as a novel biomarker for breast cancer neoadjuvant chemotherapy prediction.Cell death & disease · 2020Article
- Review
- Resistance to Neoadjuvant Treatment in Breast Cancer: Clinicopathological and Molecular Predictors.Cancers · 2020Review
- Effect of neoadjuvant therapy on breast cancer biomarker profile.BMC cancer · 2020Article
- Adjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer after preoperative chemotherapy: A propensity score matched analysis.PloS one · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Nowadays, the decision of which adjuvant treatment should be given to patients with residual breast cancer after neoadjuvant therapy is based on the initial, pretreatment breast cancer molecular subtype and on the estimated residual tumour burden after neoadjuvant therapy. Substantial biological differences exist, however, between treatment-naive breast cancer and the residual tissue that remains after neoadjuvant therapy. In addition, the evaluation of relapse risk in patients is subject to a lack of uniformity in pathological qualification and quantification of remnant breast cancer following neoadjuvant treatment. In this Review, we present the recent recommendations for standardized evaluation of response to neoadjuvant therapy in patients with breast cancer, followed by a comprehensive overview of the pathobiological features of the residual disease after neoadjuvant therapy, which could serve as prognostic biomarkers or guide the choice of targeted adjuvant approaches. These biomarker candidates are at different stages of development, but some already have demonstrated superior prognostic value compared with biomarkers derived from pretreatment breast-cancer characteristics. The evidence presented herein indicates that further research on the biology of breast cancer that persists after neoadjuvant therapy is necessary to improve the management of this disease.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.