Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32163106›Full record

Trial reportJAMA oncology2020

Association of Germline Variant Status With Therapy Response in High-risk Early-Stage Breast Cancer: A Secondary Analysis of the GeparOcto Randomized Clinical Trial.

Esther Pohl-Rescigno, Jan Hauke, Sibylle Loibl, Volker Möbus, Carsten Denkert, Peter A Fasching, Mohamad Kayali, Corinna Ernst, Nana Weber-Lassalle, Claus Hanusch and 15 more

Registry-linked trialOpen access · bronzeAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in JAMA oncology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02125344 (A Randomized Phase III Trial Comparing Two Dose-dense, Dose-intensified Approaches), which is not on this map. Cited by 50 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
50citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
7.9field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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.

NCT02125344 phase3completednot on this map

A Randomized Phase III Trial Comparing Two Dose-dense, Dose-intensified Approaches (ETC and PM(Cb)) for Neoadjuvant Treatment of Patients With High-risk Early Breast Cancer (GeparOcto)

TypeinterventionalSponsorGBG Forschungs GmbHRan2014 to 2017Enrolled961ConditionsTubular Breast Cancer Stage II, Tubular Breast Cancer Stage III, Mucinous Breast Cancer Stage II, Breast Cancer Female NOSArmsnon-pegylated liposomal doxorubicin, Carboplatin, Paclitaxel, Epirubicin, Cyclophosphamide
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

50 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 62 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Platinum-based chemotherapy for early triple-negative breast cancer.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. JCO precision oncology · 2025
    Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Adjuvant Olaparib for Patients withThe New England journal of medicine · 2021
    Trial
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Paclitaxel drives TREM2Nature communications · 2026
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  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

25 authors at 13 institutions in 1 country.

Esther Pohl-RescignoCenter for Familial Breast and Ovarian Cancer, Center for Integrated Oncology, Cologne, Faculty of Medicine, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Jan HaukeCenter for Familial Breast and Ovarian Cancer, Center for Integrated Oncology, Cologne, Faculty of Medicine, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Sibylle LoiblGerman Breast Group, Neu-Isenburg, Germany.
Volker MöbusDepartment of Medicine II, Hematology and Oncology, University of Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany.
Carsten DenkertInstitut für Pathologie, Philipps-Universität Marburg und Universitätsklinikum Marburg, Marburg, Germany.
Peter A FaschingDepartment of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Erlangen, Erlangen, Germany.
Mohamad KayaliCenter for Familial Breast and Ovarian Cancer, Center for Integrated Oncology, Cologne, Faculty of Medicine, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Corinna ErnstCenter for Familial Breast and Ovarian Cancer, Center for Integrated Oncology, Cologne, Faculty of Medicine, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Nana Weber-LassalleCenter for Familial Breast and Ovarian Cancer, Center for Integrated Oncology, Cologne, Faculty of Medicine, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Claus HanuschRotkreuzklinikum München, Frauenklinik, Munich, Germany.
Hans TeschHämatologisch-Onkologische Gemeinschaftspraxis, Frankfurt, Germany.
Volkmar MüllerDepartment of Gynecology, Hamburg-Eppendorf University Medical Center, Hamburg, Germany.
Janine AltmüllerCologne Center for Genomics, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Holger ThieleCologne Center for Genomics, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Michael UntchDepartment of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Helios Klinikum Berlin-Buch, Berlin, Germany.
Kristina LübbeBreast Center, Diakovere Henriettenstift, Hannover, Germany.
Peter NürnbergCologne Center for Genomics, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Kerstin RhiemCenter for Familial Breast and Ovarian Cancer, Center for Integrated Oncology, Cologne, Faculty of Medicine, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Jenny FurlanettoGerman Breast Group, Neu-Isenburg, Germany.
Bianca LedererGerman Breast Group, Neu-Isenburg, Germany.
Christian JackischSana Klinikum Offenbach GmbH, Offenbach, Germany.
Valentina NekljudovaGerman Breast Group, Neu-Isenburg, Germany.
Rita K SchmutzlerCenter for Familial Breast and Ovarian Cancer, Center for Integrated Oncology, Cologne, Faculty of Medicine, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Andreas SchneeweissNational Center for Tumor Diseases, Heidelberg University Hospital and German Cancer Research Center, Heidelberg, Germany.
Eric HahnenCenter for Familial Breast and Ovarian Cancer, Center for Integrated Oncology, Cologne, Faculty of Medicine, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
University Hospital Cologne · DEGerman Breast group · DEUniversity of Cologne · DEDiakovere · DEGoethe University Frankfurt · DEHelios Hospital Berlin-Buch · DEPhilipps University of Marburg · DEPraxis für Hämatologie und Onkologie · DERotkreuzklinikum München · DESana Klinikum Offenbach · DEUniversitätsklinikum Erlangen · DEUniversity Hospital Heidelberg · DEUniversity Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: The GeparOcto randomized clinical trial compared the efficacy of 2 neoadjuvant breast cancer (BC) treatment regimens: sequential intense dose-dense epirubicin, paclitaxel, and cyclophosphamide (iddEPC) vs weekly paclitaxel and nonpegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PM) in patients with different biological BC subtypes. Patients with triple-negative BC (TNBC) randomized to the PM arm received additional carboplatin (PMCb). Overall, no difference in pathologic complete response (pCR) rates was observed between study arms. It remained elusive whether the germline variant status of BRCA1/2 and further BC predisposition genes are associated with treatment outcome. Objective: To determine treatment outcome for BC according to germline variant status. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective biomarker study is a secondary analysis of the GeparOcto multicenter prospective randomized clinical trial conducted between December 2014 and June 2016. Genetic analyses assessing for variants in BRCA1/2 and 16 other BC predisposition genes in 914 of 945 women were performed at the Center for Familial Breast and Ovarian Cancer, Cologne, Germany, from August 2017 through December 2018. Main Outcomes and Measures: Proportion of patients who achieved pCR (ypT0/is ypN0 definition) after neoadjuvant treatment according to germline variant status. Results: In the study sample of 914 women with different BC subtypes with a mean (range) age at BC diagnosis of 48 (21-76) years, overall higher pCR rates were observed in patients with BRCA1/2 variants than in patients without (60.4% vs 46.7%; odds ratio [OR], 1.74; 95% CI, 1.13-2.68; P = .01); variants in non-BRCA1/2 BC predisposition genes were not associated with therapy response. Patients with TNBC with BRCA1/2 variants achieved highest pCR rates. In the TNBC subgroup, a positive BRCA1/2 variant status was associated with therapy response in both the PMCb arm (74.3% vs 47.0% without BRCA1/2 variant; OR, 3.26; 95% CI, 1.44-7.39; P = .005) and the iddEPC arm (64.7% vs 45.0%; OR, 2.24; 95% CI, 1.04-4.84; P = .04). A positive BRCA1/2 variant status was also associated with elevated pCR rates in patients with ERBB2-negative, hormone receptor-positive BC (31.8% vs 11.9%; OR, 3.44; 95% CI, 1.22-9.72; P = .02). Conclusions and Relevance: Effective chemotherapy for BRCA1/2-mutated TNBC is commonly suggested to be platinum based. With a pCR rate of 64.7%, iddEPC may also be effective in these patients, though further prospective studies are needed. The elevated pCR rate in BRCA1/2-mutated ERBB2-negative, hormone receptor-positive BC suggests that germline BRCA1/2 testing should be considered prior to treatment start. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02125344.

Indexed as

AdultAgedBreast NeoplasmsFemaleGerm-Line MutationHumansMiddle AgedNeoplasm StagingRetrospective StudiesYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID32163106
PMCPMC7068666
OpenAlexW3011708355

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.