Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29768327›Full record

SynthesisMedicine2018

Survival benefit of neoadjuvant chemotherapy for resectable breast cancer: A meta-analysis.

Yan Chen, Xiu-E Shi, Jin-Hui Tian, Xu-Juan Yang, Yong-Feng Wang, Ke-Hu Yang

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 25% of its field
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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 39 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Peritumoral Adipose Tissue Features Derived from [Journal of personalized medicine · 2024
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. 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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Yan ChenThe First Hospital of Lanzhou University Evidence-Based Medicine Center, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Lanzhou University Key Laboratory of Evidence-Based Medicine and Knowledge Translation of Gansu Province Department of Internal Medicine, Gansu Rehabilitation Center Hospital Center for Evidence-Based Rehabilitation Medicine, Gansu Province School of Basic Medical Sciences, Lanzhou University School of Basic Medical Sciences, Gansu University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Lanzhou, China.
Xiu-E Shi
Jin-Hui Tian
Xu-Juan Yang
Yong-Feng Wang
Ke-Hu Yang
Evidence Based Research (United States) · USGansu University of Traditional Chinese Medicine · CNLanzhou University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNeoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) increases breast conservation rates in patients with resectable breast cancer at the associated cost of higher locoregional recurrence rates; however, the magnitude of the survival benefits of NAC for these patients remains undefined. Therefore, we aimed to clarify the survival benefit of NAC versus postoperative chemotherapy by conducting an updated meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials (RCTs).

methodsThe authors searched the Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Chinese biomedical literature database, and Chinese Scientific Journals full-text database from their inception to December 2016. The authors identified relevant RCTs that compared NAC with postoperative chemotherapy in the treatment of operable breast cancer. The main endpoints were overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS).

resultsA total of 21 citations representing 16 unique studies were eligible. There were 787 deaths among 2794 patients assigned to NAC groups and 816 deaths among 2799 patients assigned to adjuvant chemotherapy groups. A meta-analysis of data indicated that there was no significant benefit in terms of OS ([hazard ratio [HR] = 1.03, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.94-1.13, P = .51) and RFS (HR = 1.01, 95% CI: 0.93-1.10, P = .80) between the NAC and postoperative chemotherapy groups. The pooled HR estimate for OS was not influenced by NAC cycles, the total number of chemotherapy cycles, administration of tamoxifen, administration of adjuvant chemotherapy, or type of NAC regimen. Subgroup analysis showed that the pooled HR estimate for RFS was influenced by anthracycline-containing regimens. Patients with a pathological complete response had superior survival outcomes compared with patients who had residual disease.

conclusionThe survival benefits for patients with operable breast cancer who received either NAC or adjuvant chemotherapy based on anthracycline regimens were comparable.

Indexed as

Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsBreast NeoplasmsChemotherapy, AdjuvantHumansNeoadjuvant TherapyRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSurvival Rate

Identifiers

PMID29768327
PMCPMC5976345
OpenAlexW2804683215

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.