Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36012949›Full record

ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2022

Metronomic Chemotherapy for Metastatic Breast Cancer Treatment: Clinical and Preclinical Data between Lights and Shadows.

Marina Elena Cazzaniga, Serena Capici, Nicoletta Cordani, Viola Cogliati, Francesca Fulvia Pepe, Francesca Riva, Maria Grazia Cerrito

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Targeting Breast Cancer: An Overlook on Current Strategies.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023
    Review
  16. Article
  17. 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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Marina Elena CazzanigaSchool of Medicine and Surgery, Milano-Bicocca University, 20900 Monza, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-1756-6935
Serena CapiciPhase 1 Research Centre, ASST Monza, 20900 Monza, Italy.
Nicoletta CordaniSchool of Medicine and Surgery, Milano-Bicocca University, 20900 Monza, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-3227-8280
Viola CogliatiPhase 1 Research Centre, ASST Monza, 20900 Monza, Italy.
Francesca Fulvia PepePhase 1 Research Centre, ASST Monza, 20900 Monza, Italy.
Francesca RivaOncology Unit, ASST Monza, 20900 Monza, Italy.
Maria Grazia CerritoSchool of Medicine and Surgery, Milano-Bicocca University, 20900 Monza, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-3347-5817
University of Milano-Bicocca · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Metronomic chemotherapy (mCHT), defined as continuous administration of low-dose chemotherapeutic agents with no or short regular treatment-free intervals, was first introduced to the clinic in international guidelines in 2017, and, since then, has become one of the available strategies for the treatment of advanced breast cancer (ABC). Despite recent successes, many unsolved practical and theoretical issues remain to be addressed. The present review aims to identify the "lights and shadows" of mCHT in preclinical and clinical settings. In the preclinical setting, several findings indicate that one of the most noticeable effects of mCHT is on the tumor microenvironment, which, over the last twenty years, has been demonstrated to be pivotal in supporting tumor cell survival and proliferation. On the other hand, the direct effects on tumor cells have been less well-defined. In addition, critical items to be addressed are the lack of definition of an optimal biological dose (OBD), the method of administration of metronomic schedules, and the recognition and validation of predictive biomarkers. In the clinical context-where mCHT has mainly been used in a metastatic setting-low toxicity is the most well-recognised light of mCHT, whereas the type of study design, the absence of randomised trials and uncertainty in terms of doses and drugs remain among the shadows. In conclusion, growing evidence indicates that mCHT is a suitable treatment option for selected metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patients. Moreover, given its multimodal mechanisms of action, its addition to immunological and targeted therapies might represent a promising new approach to the treatment of MBC. More preclinical data are needed in this regard, which can only be obtained through support for translational research as the key link between basic science and patient care.

Indexed as

breast cancermetronomic chemotherapysafety

Identifiers

PMID36012949
PMCPMC9410269
OpenAlexW4291777355

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.