ReviewGeburtshilfe und Frauenheilkunde2016
ABC3 Consensus Commented from the Perspective of the German Guidelines: Third International Consensus Conference for Advanced Breast Cancer (ABC3), Lisbon, 07. 11. 2015.
Review in Geburtshilfe und Frauenheilkunde, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review of concepts in therapeutic decision-making in HER2-negative luminal metastatic breast cancer.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2020Pooled it
- First‑line endocrine therapy for hormone receptor positive and HER‑2 negative metastatic breast cancer: A Bayesian network meta‑analysis.Oncology letters · 2024Article
- Efficacy and safety of low-dose everolimus combined with endocrine drugs for patients with hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative metastatic breast cancer.Annals of translational medicine · 2021Article
- Additional radiotherapy to breast-conserving surgery is an optional treatment for de novo stage IV breast cancer: A population-based analysis.Cancer medicine · 2021Article
- Aggressive Local Treatment Improves Survival in Stage IV Breast Cancer With Synchronous Metastasis.Frontiers in oncology · 2020Article
- Integrated genomics and functional validation identifies malignant cell specific dependencies in triple negative breast cancer.Nature communications · 2018Article
- Surgery of the primary tumor improves survival in women with stage IV breast cancer in Southwest China: A retrospective analysis.Medicine · 2017Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors at 11 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The Third International Consensus Conference for Advanced Breast Cancer ABC3 on the diagnosis and treatment of advanced breast cancer was held in Lisbon from 5 to 7 November 2015. This year the focus was the treatment of metastatic breast cancer (stage IV) - including the patient perspectives. Important topics were questions relating to quality of life, the care for long-term survivors as well as the management of disease-related symptoms and treatment-based side effects. The use of standardised tools to assess individual treatment success and the benefits of new substances were important points for discussion. The diagnosis and treatment of inoperable locally advanced breast cancer were discussed two years ago during the ABC2 consensus 1. A working group of German breast cancer experts commented on the results of the ABC panellists, paying particular attention to the German guidelines (AGO, S3, DGHO) on the diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer 2, 3, 4, 5 in Germany.
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.