ArticleMedicine2016
Combination of 125I brachytherapy and chemotherapy for unresectable recurrent breast cancer: A retrospective control study.
Article in Medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effect of therapeutic care for treating fatigue in patients with breast cancer receiving chemotherapy.Medicine · 2017Trial
- Evaluation of therapeutic effects ofOncology letters · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Recurrent breast cancer remains an incurable malignancy and cannot be removed by surgery in the majority of cases. This study aimed to explore the feasibility and efficacy of the combination of I brachytherapy and chemotherapy for the treatment of unresectable recurrent breast cancer. Patients with unresectable recurrent breast cancer treated between January 2011 and December 2014 with a combination of I brachytherapy and capecitabine or gemcitabine were evaluated and outcomes were compared with those of women treated with capecitabine or gemcitabine in conventional dose as a monotherapy. Of 61 patients evaluated, 28 received the combination treatment and 33 received capecitabine or gemcitabine monotherapy. The combination of I brachytherapy and chemotherapy resulted in a significant improvement in progression-free survival versus capecitabine or gemcitabine monotherapy (median, 17.8 vs 11.4 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.44; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.23-0.84; P = 0.013). The objective response rate (ORR) was significantly higher with the combination (82.1%) than with monotherapy (54.5%; P = 0.022), and the rate of pain relief was higher in the combination arm (100% vs 73.6%; P = 0.038). There was no significant improvement for overall survival (median, 30.1 vs 27.2 months; HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.47-1.44; P = 0.496). There were no serious complications detected during the follow-up period, any grade toxicities were comparable between treatment arms. In conclusion, the combination of I brachytherapy and second-line chemotherapy is superior to chemotherapy alone and is an effective and safe therapy for unresectable recurrent breast cancer. However, further investigation and much larger scale randomized controlled trials with long-term follow-up are needed.
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.