Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27350260›Full record

ArticleJournal of cancer research and clinical oncology2016

Adjuvant chemotherapy in elderly patients with primary breast cancer: are women ≥65 undertreated?

C W Wallwiener, A D Hartkopf, E Grabe, M Wallwiener, F-A Taran, T Fehm, S Y Brucker, B Krämer

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing 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

20 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Defining Undertreatment and Overtreatment in Older Adults With Cancer: A Scoping Literature Review.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2020
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  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.

C W WallwienerDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Tuebingen, Calwerstraße 7, 72076, Tübingen, Germany. cwallwiener@gmail.com.
A D HartkopfDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Tuebingen, Calwerstraße 7, 72076, Tübingen, Germany.
E GrabeDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Tuebingen, Calwerstraße 7, 72076, Tübingen, Germany.
M WallwienerDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 110, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
F-A TaranDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Tuebingen, Calwerstraße 7, 72076, Tübingen, Germany.
T FehmDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Duesseldorf, Moorenstraße 5, 40225, Düsseldorf, Germany.
S Y BruckerDepartment of Women's Health, University of Tuebingen, Calwerstrasse 7, 72076, Tübingen, Germany.
B KrämerDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Tuebingen, Calwerstraße 7, 72076, Tübingen, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo establish whether women over 65 years of age with newly diagnosed with breast cancer (BC) receive adjuvant chemotherapy less frequently than younger postmenopausal women and whether comorbidity influences this potential undertreatment. MATERIALS AND

methodsIn a single-site, retrospective, comparative study, postmenopausal early stage BC patients treated between 01/2001 and 12/2005 at a major German university hospital were analyzed in two age Groups A and B (≥65 vs. <65 years) for initiation and completion of guideline-recommended adjuvant chemotherapy. Risk stratification was based on the 2005 St. Gallen Consensus Conference criteria. Comorbidity was parametrized using the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI).

resultsAnalysis included 634 patients, 380 in Group A and 254 in Group B. Mean age (range) was 73 (65-94) and 61 (55-64) years, respectively. The proportion of patients from Group A given ≥3 cycles of chemotherapy was significantly decreased as compared to Group B. 52 % of patients with CCI <3 but only 20 % with CCI ≥3 were recommended to undergo chemotherapy (p < 0.001). Median follow-up [95 % confidence interval (CI)] was 85 (82-88) months. DFS was significantly shorter in patients aged ≥65 years as compared to younger postmenopausal patients (HR, 0.598; 95 % CI, 0.358-0.963; p = 0.048).

conclusionsDespite being high-risk patients, older women with early stage BC were often not given guideline-recommended chemotherapy. Higher recurrence rates compared with younger postmenopausal women suggest that older patients are undertreated. Treatment needs to be adapted to general health and tumor biology rather than age. More trials in elderly BC patients are needed.

Indexed as

AgedAged, 80 and overBreast NeoplasmsChemotherapy, AdjuvantFemaleHumansRetrospective StudiesSurvival AnalysisAgeBreast cancerElderlyPostmenopausal womenSurvivalTreatment response

Identifiers

PMID27350260
PMCPMC11819201

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.