SynthesisPloS one2020
Does dose-dense neoadjuvant chemotherapy have clinically significant prognostic value in breast cancer?: A meta-analysis of 3,724 patients.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05275777 (A Phase Ib Safety lead-in, Followed by Phase II Trial of ADG106 in Combination With Neoadjuvant Doxorubicin and Cyclophosphamide Followed by Paclitaxel in Stage I-III HER2 Negative Breast Cancer), which is not on this map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
A Phase Ib Safety lead-in, Followed by Phase II Trial of ADG106 in Combination With Neoadjuvant Doxorubicin and Cyclophosphamide Followed by Paclitaxel in Stage I-III HER2 Negative Breast Cancer
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Canadian national guideline on the neoadjuvant treatment of invasive breast cancer, including patient assessment, systemic therapy, and local management principles.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2022Guideline
- Real-world effectiveness of mecapegfilgrastim for prophylaxis in patients with breast cancer receiving 2-weekly and 3-weekly chemotherapy in China.BMC cancer · 2026Observational
- TMB as a predictive biomarker for ICI response in TNBC: current evidence and future directions for augmented anti-tumor responses.Clinical and experimental medicine · 2025Review
- Monitoring Over Time of Pathological Complete Response to Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Breast Cancer Patients Through an Ensemble Vision Transformers-Based Model.Cancer medicine · 2024Article
- Article
- Integration of Postoperative Radiation Therapy with Cyclin-Dependent Kinase (CDK) Inhibitors.Current oncology reports · 2023Review
- Precision Breast Cancer Medicine: Early Stage Triple Negative Breast Cancer-A Review of Molecular Characterisation, Therapeutic Targets and Future Trends.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Review
- Article
- Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy, Endocrine Therapy, and Targeted Therapy for Breast Cancer: ASCO Guideline.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2021Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeNeoadjuvant chemotherapy (NCT) is typically the initial treatment for non-early breast cancer patients. We thereby conducted a meta-analysis to explore whether dose-dense neoadjuvant chemotherapy (ddNCT) improved the long-term prognosis of patients compared to the standard NCT regimen.
methodsWe compared the differences in efficacy and prognosis between patients receiving standard NCT and ddNCT. We also calculated the pooled odds ratio (OR) of pathological complete response (pCR) and the pooled hazard ratio (HR) of overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS).
resultsNine randomized controlled trials involving 3,724 patients from 10 published studies were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled OR for ddNCT was 1.18 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.83-1.67, P = 0.356). A subgroup analysis in the cases with low hormone receptor expression levels showed the pCR in patients undergoing ddNCT was significantly higher than the pCR in patients undergoing standard NCT (OR = 1.36, 95% CI: 1.09‒1.69, P = 0.007). There was no significant difference in DFS and OS between ddNCT and standard NCT (DFS: HR = 0.90, 95% CI: 0.79‒1.02, P = 0.095; OS; HR = 0.91, 95% CI: 0.81‒1.04, P = 0.160), regardless of hormone receptor expression levels. These data suggested the higher pCR rate in patients receiving ddNCT did not result in a survival benefit.
conclusionsThe meta-analysis demonstrated that ddNCT can significantly improve the pCR rate in patients with low hormone receptor expression levels, although patient survival was not significantly improved. The ddNCT can increase the breast-conserving rate and reduced pre-operative waiting time without increasing adverse reactions. This regimen can be considered when developing an NCT plan.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.