ArticleClinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico2019
Outcomes of early-stage breast cancer patients treated with sequential anthracyclines-taxanes in relationship to relative dosing intensity: a secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial.
Article in Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Exploring trop-2-directed ADCs monotherapy and combination therapy in pretreated mTNBC: a real-world study.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2026Article
- Sex differences in toxicity and outcomes in patients with sarcoma treated in the perioperative setting at a comprehensive cancer center.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- Body Composition, Adherence to Anthracycline and Taxane-Based Chemotherapy, and Survival After Nonmetastatic Breast Cancer.JAMA oncology · 2020Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo assess the impact of relative dosing intensity (RDI) on the outcomes of breast cancer patients referred for adjuvant anthracycline-taxane chemotherapy.
methodsThis is a secondary analysis of the outcomes of patients in the comparator arm of the BCIRG005 study who received adjuvant adriamycin/cyclophosphamide (AC)-docetaxel regimen. Overall survival was assessed according to RDI through Kaplan-Meier analysis. Univariate and multivariate analyses of parameters affecting overall survival were then conducted through Cox regression analysis.
resultsKaplan-Meier analysis of overall survival according to RDI for the AC-docetaxel regimen (< 90 vs. ≥ 90%) was conducted and it showed that RDI < 90% is associated with worse overall survival (P = 0.006). In univariate Cox regression analysis, the following parameters significantly affected overall survival (P < 0.05): age, T stage, lymph node ratio, hormone receptor status, and grade of the disease and RDI for AC-docetaxel regimen. When these factors were included in multivariate analysis, the following factors were associated with worse overall survival: age less than 40 years (P < 0.0001), greater T stage (P < 0.0001), greater lymph node ratio (P < 0.0001), negative hormone receptor status (P = 0.001), high grade (P < 0.0001) and RDI ≤ 90% (P = 0.015). Formal interaction testing between RDI and hormone receptor status has a non-significant P value (P = 0.794).
conclusionLower RDI for the whole anthracycline-taxane protocol is associated with worse patient survival. Every effort should be exercised to avoid unnecessary dose reductions and/or interruptions among early breast cancer patients receiving adjuvant anthracycline-taxane chemotherapy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
29956074What 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.