Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37012180›Full record

Trial reportClinical oncology (Royal College of Radiologists (Great Britain))2023

Detailed Sub-study Analysis of the SECRAB Trial: Quality of Life, Cosmesis and Chemotherapy Dose Intensity.

I N Fernando, S Lax, S J Bowden, I Ahmed, J H Steven, M Churn, A M Brunt, R K Agrawal, P Canney, A Stevens and 1 more

Open access · hybridAbstract readRandomized Controlled TrialMulticenter StudyClinical Trial, Phase III
In one paragraph

Trial report in Clinical oncology (Royal College of Radiologists (Great Britain)), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 24% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
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

11 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.

I N FernandoCancer Centre, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Birmingham, UK. Electronic address: indrajit.fernando@uhb.nhs.uk.
S LaxCancer Research UK Clinical Trials Unit, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
S J BowdenCancer Research UK Clinical Trials Unit, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
I AhmedCancer Research UK Clinical Trials Unit, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
J H StevenCancer Centre, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Birmingham, UK.
M ChurnClinical Oncology, Worcestershire Royal Hospital, Worcester, UK.
A M BruntCancer Centre, Royal Stoke University Hospital, Stoke on Trent, UK; Keele University, Keele, UK.
R K AgrawalThe Shrewsbury and Telford NHS Trust, Shrewsbury, UK.
P CanneyBeatson West of Scotland Cancer Centre, Glasgow, UK.
A StevensCancer Centre, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Birmingham, UK.
D W ReaCancer Centre, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Birmingham, UK; Cancer Research UK Clinical Trials Unit, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
Queen Elizabeth Hospital Birmingham · GBUniversity of Birmingham · GBBeatson West of Scotland Cancer Centre · GBCancer Research UK Clinical Trials Unit · GBKeele University · GBShrewsbury and Telford Hospital NHS Trust · GBWorcestershire Royal Hospital · GB

Funding

Cancer Research UK 25354Cancer Research UK CRUK/98/001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsSECRAB was a prospective, open-label, multicentre, randomised phase III trial comparing synchronous to sequential chemoradiotherapy (CRT). Conducted in 48 UK centres, it recruited 2297 patients (1150 synchronous and 1146 sequential) between 2 July 1998 and 25 March 2004. SECRAB reported a positive therapeutic benefit of using adjuvant synchronous CRT in the management of breast cancer; 10-year local recurrence rates reduced from 7.1% to 4.6% (P = 0.012). The greatest benefit was seen in patients treated with anthracycline-cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, 5-fluorouracil (CMF) rather than CMF. The aim of its sub-studies reported here was to assess whether quality of life (QoL), cosmesis or chemotherapy dose intensity differed between the two CRT regimens. MATERIALS AND

methodsThe QoL sub-study used EORTC QLQ-C30, EORTC QLQ-BR23 and the Women's Health Questionnaire. Cosmesis was assessed: (i) by the treating clinician, (ii) by a validated independent consensus scoring method and (iii) from the patients' perspective by analysing four cosmesis-related QoL questions within the QLQ-BR23. Chemotherapy doses were captured from pharmacy records. The sub-studies were not formally powered; rather, the aim was that at least 300 patients (150 in each arm) were recruited and differences in QoL, cosmesis and dose intensity of chemotherapy assessed. The analysis, therefore, is exploratory in nature.

resultsNo differences were observed in the change from baseline in QoL between the two arms assessed up to 2 years post-surgery (Global Health Status: -0.05; 95% confidence interval -2.16, 2.06; P = 0.963). No differences in cosmesis were observed (via independent and patient assessment) up to 5 years post-surgery. The percentage of patients receiving the optimal course-delivered dose intensity (≥85%) was not significantly different between the arms (synchronous 88% versus sequential 90%; P = 0.503).

conclusionsSynchronous CRT is tolerable, deliverable and significantly more effective than sequential, with no serious disadvantages identified when assessing 2-year QoL or 5-year cosmetic differences.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsQuality of LifeAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsChemoradiotherapy, AdjuvantChemotherapy, AdjuvantCyclophosphamideFemaleFluorouracilHumansMethotrexateProspective StudiesCyclophosphamideFluorouracilMethotrexateBreast cancerchemotherapyclinical trialcosmesisdose intensityquality of liferadiotherapysecondary outcomesSECRAB

Identifiers

PMID37012180
PMCPMC10186116
OpenAlexW4327919497

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.