Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30144818›Full record

Trial reportBMC cancer2018

RESPONDER - diagnosis of pathological complete response by vacuum-assisted biopsy after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast Cancer - a multicenter, confirmative, one-armed, intra-individually-controlled, open, diagnostic trial.

Joerg Heil, Peter Sinn, Hannah Richter, André Pfob, Benedikt Schaefgen, André Hennigs, Fabian Riedel, Bettina Thomas, Marc Thill, Markus Hahn and 8 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract readClinical TrialMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC cancer, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02948764 (RESPONDER Trial - Diagnosis of Pathological Complete Response by Vacuum-assisted Biopsy After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Breast Cancer), which is not on this map. Cited by 25 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT02948764 nacompletednot on this map

RESPONDER Trial - Diagnosis of Pathological Complete Response by Vacuum-assisted Biopsy After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Breast Cancer

TypeinterventionalSponsorHeidelberg UniversityRan2017 to 2019Enrolled452ConditionsBreast NeoplasmsArmsVacuum-Assisted Biopsy
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

25 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Observational
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Augmented Reality-Assisted Ultrasound Breast Biopsy.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Breast Cancer Surgery: New Issues.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2021
    Review
  19. Observational
  20. 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

18 authors.

Joerg HeilDepartment of Gynecology, Breast Center, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany. Joerg.Heil@med.uni-heidelberg.de.
Peter SinnDepartment of Pathology, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany.
Hannah RichterDepartment of Gynecology, Breast Center, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany.
André PfobDepartment of Gynecology, Breast Center, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany.
Benedikt SchaefgenDepartment of Gynecology, Breast Center, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany.
André HennigsDepartment of Gynecology, Breast Center, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany.
Fabian RiedelDepartment of Gynecology, Breast Center, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany.
Bettina ThomasKoordinierungszentrum für Klinische Studien (KKS), Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany.
Marc ThillDepartment of Gynecology, Agaplesion Markus Hospital, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Markus HahnDepartment of Gynecology, Tuebingen University, Tuebingen, Germany.
Jens-Uwe BlohmerDepartment of Gynecology, Charité Universitaetsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Sherko KuemmelDepartment of Gynecology, Hospital Kliniken Essen-Mitte, Essen, Germany.
Maria Margarete KarstenDepartment of Gynecology, Charité Universitaetsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Mattea ReinischDepartment of Gynecology, Hospital Kliniken Essen-Mitte, Essen, Germany.
John HackmannDepartment of Gynecology, Marien Hospital Witten, Witten, Germany.
Toralf ReimerDepartment of Gynecology, Rostock University, Rostock, Germany.
Geraldine RauchCharité Universitaetsmedizin Berlin, Institute of Biometry and Clinical Epidemiology, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Michael GolattaDepartment of Gynecology, Breast Center, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany.

Funding

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft funding programme Open Access Publishing, by the Baden-Württemberg Ministry of Science, Research and the Arts and by Ruprecht-Karls-Universität HeidelbergDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft HE 6824/5-1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNeoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) is a standard approach of the multidisciplinary treatment of breast cancer. Depending on the biological subtype a pathological complete response in the breast (bpCR) can be achieved in up to 60% of the patients. However, only limited accuracy can be reached when using imaging for prediction of bpCR prior to surgery. Due to this diagnostic uncertainty, surgery after NACT is considered to be obligatory for all patients in order to either completely remove residual disease or to diagnose a bpCR histologically. The purpose of this trial is to evaluate the accuracy of a vacuum-assisted biopsy (VAB) to diagnose a bpCR after NACT prior to surgery.

methodsThis study is a multicenter, confirmative, one-armed, intra-individually-controlled, open, diagnostic trial. The study will take place at 21 trial sites in Germany. Six hundred female patients with breast cancer after completed NACT showing at least a partial response to NACT treatment will be enrolled. A vacuum-assisted biopsy (VAB) guided either by ultrasound or mammography will be performed followed by histopathological evaluation of the VAB specimen before standard, guideline-adherent breast surgery. The study is designed to prove that the false negative rate of the VAB is below 10%. DISCUSSION: As a bpCR is becoming a more frequent result after NACT, the question arises whether breast surgery is therapeutically necessary in such cases. To study this subject further, it will be crucial to develop a reliable test to diagnose a bpCR without surgery. During the study we anticipate possible problems in patient recruitment as the VAB intervention does not provide participating patients with any personal benefit. Hence, a proficient informed consent discussion with the patient and a detailed explanation of the study aim will be crucial for patient recruitment. Another critical issue is the histopathological VAB evaluation of a non-tumorous specimen as this may have been taken either from the former tumor region (bpCR) or outside of the (former) tumor region (non-representative VAB, sampling error).

trial registrationThe trial has been registered at clinicaltrials.gov with the identifier NCT02948764 on October 28, 2016 and at the German Clinical Trials Register ( DRKS00011761 ) on February 20, 2017. The date of enrolment of the first participant to the trial was on March 8, 2017.

Indexed as

Neoadjuvant TherapyAdolescentAdultAgedBiopsy, NeedleBreastBreast NeoplasmsFemaleGermanyHumansImage-Guided BiopsyMammographyMiddle AgedVacuumYoung AdultBreast cancerNeoadjuvant chemotherapyTreatment response evaluationVacuum-assisted biopsy

Identifiers

PMID30144818
PMCPMC6109284

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.