SynthesisBioengineered2022
Platinum-based adjuvant therapy was efficient for triple-negative breast cancer: a meta-analysis from randomized controlled trials.
Synthesis in Bioengineered, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It carries an expression of concern. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- PinX1 plays multifaceted roles in human cancers: a review and perspectives.Molecular biology reports · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
- Expression of concern
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) is the most aggressive breast cancer. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy was widely accepted for treating TNBC. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the efficacy, safety, and survival benefit of platinum-based adjuvant therapy (PBAT) in treating TNBC. The keywords were searched in Medline, Embase, Pubmed, and Cochrane Library database up to July 24, 2022. All the randomized control trials (RCTs) comparing PBAT and non-PBAT in treating TNBC were included in our study. The pathological complete remission (pCR) and complications were compared by odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). The overall survival (OS) and relapse-free survival (RFS) were compared by hazard ratio (HR) and 95% CIs. A total of 19 RCTs were included in our meta-analysis, among which 2,501 patients were treated with PBAT and 2,290 with non-PBAT. The patients treated with PBAT combined a significantly higher pCR rate compared to those patients treated with non-PBAT (49.8% versus 36.4%, OR = 1.27, 95%CI = 1.14-1.43, P < 0.001). Besides, patients treated with PBAT had a significantly better RFS (HR = 0.78, 95%CI = 0.63-0.95, P = 0.016), but not in OS (HR = 0.84, P = 0.304). Although the occurrence of neutropenia and nausea were slightly different between the PBAT group (51.5% and 24.4%) and the non-PBAT group (47.0% and 29.4%), the complications were acceptable in the two treatments groups. Our results demonstrated that TNBC patients treated with PBAT could achieve a higher pCR rate and better RFS benefit without a higher complication rate.
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.