Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31842957›Full record

SynthesisBreast cancer research : BCR2019

Current treatment landscape for patients with locally recurrent inoperable or metastatic triple-negative breast cancer: a systematic literature review.

Claire H Li, Vassiliki Karantza, Gursel Aktan, Mallika Lala

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Breast cancer research : BCR, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 83 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
83citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
12.2field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

83 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 142 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Durvalumab plus Paclitaxel, with or without Capivasertib or Oleclumab, in Patients with Locally Advanced/Metastatic Triple-Negative Breast Cancer.Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research · 2026
    Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Effect ofCancer science · 2023
    Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article

23 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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Claire H LiMerck & Co., Inc., Kenilworth, NJ, USA.
Vassiliki KarantzaMerck & Co., Inc., Kenilworth, NJ, USA.
Gursel AktanMerck & Co., Inc., Kenilworth, NJ, USA.
Mallika LalaMerck & Co., Inc., Kenilworth, NJ, USA. mallika.lala@merck.com.
Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA (United States) · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMetastatic triple-negative breast cancer (mTNBC), an aggressive histological subtype, has poor prognosis. Chemotherapy remains standard of care for mTNBC, although no agent has been specifically approved for this breast cancer subtype. Instead, chemotherapies approved for metastatic breast cancer (MBC) are used for mTNBC (National Comprehensive Cancer Network Guidelines [NCCN] v1.2019). Atezolizumab in combination with nab-paclitaxel was recently approved for programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1)-positive locally advanced or metastatic TNBC. Published historical data were reviewed to characterize the efficacy of NCCN-recommended (v1.2016) agents as first-line (1L) and second-line or later (2L+) treatment for patients with locally recurrent inoperable or metastatic TNBC (collectively termed mTNBC herein).

methodsA systematic literature review was performed, examining clinical efficacy of therapies for mTNBC based on NCCN v1.2016 guideline recommendations. Data from 13 studies, either published retrospective mTNBC subgroup analyses based on phase III trials in MBC or phase II trials in mTNBC, were included.

resultsA meta-analysis of mTNBC subgroups from three phase III trials in 1L MBC reported pooled objective response rate (ORR) of 23%, median overall survival (OS) of 17.5 months, and median progression-free survival (PFS) of 5.4 months with single-agent chemotherapy. In two subgroup analyses from a phase III study and a phase II trial (n = 40 each), median duration of response (DOR) to 1L chemotherapy for mTNBC was 4.4-6.6 months; therefore, responses were not durable. A meta-analysis of seven cohorts showed the pooled ORR for 2L+ chemotherapy was 11% (95% CI, 9-14%). Median DOR to 2L+ chemotherapy in mTNBC was also limited (4.2-5.9 months) per two subgroup analyses from a phase III study. No combination chemotherapy regimens recommended by NCCN v1.2016 for treatment of MBC showed superior OS to single agents.

conclusionsChemotherapies have limited effectiveness and are associated with unfavorable toxicity profiles, highlighting a considerable unmet medical need for improved therapeutic options in mTNBC. In addition to the recently approved combination of atezolizumab and nab-paclitaxel for PD-L1-positive mTNBC, new treatments resulting in durable clinical responses, prolonged survival, and manageable safety profile would greatly benefit patients with mTNBC.

Indexed as

Antineoplastic AgentsAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsBiomarkers, TumorClinical Trials, Phase III as TopicDisease ManagementHumansMolecular Targeted TherapyNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalOdds RatioPrognosisRetreatmentTreatment OutcomeTriple Negative Breast NeoplasmsAntineoplastic AgentsBiomarkers, TumorChemotherapyImmune checkpoint inhibitorMetastatic triple-negative breast cancerPARP inhibitor

Identifiers

PMID31842957
PMCPMC6916124
OpenAlexW2995857279

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.