Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30833989›Full record

ReviewTherapeutic advances in medical oncology2019

Post-neoadjuvant treatment and the management of residual disease in breast cancer: state of the art and perspectives.

Rafael Caparica, Matteo Lambertini, Noam Pondé, Debora Fumagalli, Evandro de Azambuja, Martine Piccart

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Therapeutic advances in medical oncology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

34 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 66 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Evaluation of pathological complete response rates in breast cancer patients undergoing neoadjuvant therapy.Revista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetricia : revista da Federacao Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetricia · 2025
    Observational
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Rafael CaparicaInstitut Jules Bordet, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium.
Matteo LambertiniInstitut Jules Bordet, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1797-5296
Noam PondéInstitut Jules Bordet, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium.
Debora FumagalliBreast International Group, Brussels, Belgium.
Evandro de AzambujaInstitut Jules Bordet, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium.
Martine PiccartInstitut Jules Bordet, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Boulevard de Waterloo 121, 1000 Bruxelles, Belgium.
Université Libre de Bruxelles · BEBreast International Group · BE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Achieving a pathologic complete response after neoadjuvant treatment is associated with improved prognosis in breast cancer. The CREATE-X trial demonstrated a significant survival improvement with capecitabine in patients with residual invasive disease after neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and the KATHERINE trial showed a significant benefit of trastuzumab-emtansine (TDM1) in human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive patients who did not achieve a pathologic complete response after neoadjuvant treatment, creating interesting alternatives of post-neoadjuvant treatments for high-risk patients. New agents are arising as therapeutic options for metastatic breast cancer such as the cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitors and the immune-checkpoint inhibitors, but none has been incorporated into the post-neoadjuvant setting so far. Evolving techniques such as next-generation sequencing and gene expression profiles have improved our knowledge regarding the biology of residual disease, and also on the mechanisms involved in treatment resistance. The present manuscript reviews the current available strategies, the ongoing trials, the potential biomarker-guided approaches and the perspectives for the post-neoadjuvant treatment and the management of residual disease after neoadjuvant treatment in breast cancer.

Indexed as

breast cancerchemotherapypathologic complete responsepost-neoadjuvantresidual disease

Identifiers

PMID30833989
PMCPMC6393951
OpenAlexW2917126787

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.