ArticleThe New England journal of medicine2017
Questioning Our APHINITY for More.
Article in The New England journal of medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- 6 versus 12 months of adjuvant trastuzumab for HER2-positive early breast cancer (PERSEPHONE): 4-year disease-free survival results of a randomised phase 3 non-inferiority trial.Lancet (London, England) · 2019Trial
- Genomic Classification of HER2-Positive Patients With 80-Gene and 70-Gene Signatures Identifies Diversity in Clinical Outcomes With HER2-Targeted Neoadjuvant Therapy.JCO precision oncology · 2022Article
- Impact of Circulating Tumor DNA-Based Detection of Molecular Residual Disease on the Conduct and Design of Clinical Trials for Solid Tumors.JCO precision oncology · 2022Review
- Clinical and Biological Aspects of Disseminated Tumor Cells and Dormancy in Breast Cancer.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2022Review
- Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy for Breast Cancer: Past, Present, and Future.Breast cancer : basic and clinical research · 2020Review
- Progress in adjuvant systemic therapy for breast cancer.Nature reviews. Clinical oncology · 2019Review
- Conflict of interest: "Be rigorous in judging ourselves and gracious in judging others".Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2018Article
- Surrogate endpoints in oncology: when are they acceptable for regulatory and clinical decisions, and are they currently overused?BMC medicine · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
- Comment on
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.
Identifiers
28581347What 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.