Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31448088›Full record

ReviewF1000Research2019

Triple-negative breast cancer: recent treatment advances.

Alice R T Bergin, Sherene Loi

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in F1000Research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 119 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
119citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
–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.

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

119 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Response of MDA-MB231 cells to cisplatin and paclitaxel - viability, migration and gene expression estimation in mono- and co-culture with macrophages.Reports of practical oncology and radiotherapy : journal of Greatpoland Cancer Center in Poznan and Polish Society of Radiation Oncology · 2025
    Article
  20. Article

59 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

2 authors.

Alice R T BerginPeter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-2150-879X
Sherene LoiPeter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-6137-9171

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) is a breast cancer subtype renowned for its capacity to affect younger women, metastasise early despite optimal adjuvant treatment and carry a poor prognosis. Neoadjuvant therapy has focused on combinations of systemic agents to optimise pathological complete response. Treatment algorithms now guide the management of patients with or without residual disease, but metastatic TNBC continues to harbour a poor prognosis. Innovative, multi-drug combination systemic therapies in the neoadjuvant and adjuvant settings have led to significant improvements in outcomes, particularly over the past decade. Recently published advances in the treatment of metastatic TNBC have shown impressive results with poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors and immunotherapy agents. Immunotherapy agents in combination with traditional systemic chemotherapy have been shown to alter the natural history of this devastating condition, particularly in patients whose tumours are positive for programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1).

Indexed as

ImmunotherapyTriple Negative Breast NeoplasmsFemaleHumansNeoadjuvant TherapyImmunotherapyTriple negative breast cancer

Identifiers

PMID31448088
PMCPMC6681627

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.