ArticleClinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico2018
The ever-evolving role of pathologists in the management of breast cancer with neoadjuvant treatment: recommendations based on the Spanish clinical experience.
Article in Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico, 2018. 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.
- Developing consensus in Histopathology: the role of the Delphi method.Histopathology · 2022Review
- Neoadjuvant Management of Early Breast Cancer: A Clinical and Investigational Position Statement.The oncologist · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo compare the current international standards for neoadjuvant systemic therapy (NAST) protocols, and establish consensus recommendations by Spanish breast pathologists; and to look into the Spanish reality of defining pathological complete response in daily practice. MATERIALS AND
methodsA modified Delphi technique was used to gain consensus among a panel of 46 experts with regard to important issues about NAST specimens, with the objective of standardize handling and analysis of these breast cancer specimens. In addition, a survey was conducted among 174 pathologists to explore the Spanish reality of post-NAST breast cancer specimens handling.
resultsOur survey shows that pathologists in Spain follow the same guidelines as their international colleagues and face the same problems and controversies. Among the experts, 94.1% agreed on the recommendation for a pre-treatment evaluation with a core needle biopsy, and 100% of experts agreed on the need of having properly indicated information for the post-NAST surgical specimens. However, only 82.7% of them receive properly labelled specimens and even less receive specimens where markers are identified and the degree of clinical/radiological response is mentioned. Among participants 59.9% were familiar with the residual cancer burden system for post-NAST response quantification, but only 16.1% used it regularly.
conclusionsActive participation on breast cancer multidisciplinary teams, optimal usage of core needle biopsy for timely and standardized procedures for the diagnostic analysis, and accurate diagnosis of pathological complete response and complete evaluation of the response to NAST need to become the standard practice when handling breast cancer specimens in Spain.
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.