Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37222922›Full record

ReviewCurrent treatment options in oncology2023

Immunotherapy in Early-Stage Triple-Negative Breast Cancer: Where Are We Now and Where Are We Headed?

Julia Dixon-Douglas, Sherene Loi

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Current treatment options in oncology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
6.9field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 30 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. American journal of cancer research · 2024
    Article
  15. Article
  16. 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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Julia Dixon-DouglasDivision of Research, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, 305 Grattan St, Melbourne, Australia.
Sherene LoiDivision of Research, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, 305 Grattan St, Melbourne, Australia. sherene.loi@petermac.org.ORCID 0000-0001-6137-9171
Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

opinion statementRecently, the addition of PD-1 pathway targeting immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) to standard neoadjuvant chemotherapy for early-stage triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) has been shown to improve rates of pathological complete response (pCR), as well as event-free survival regardless of attainment of pCR. Recurrent TNBC remains a devastating diagnosis and thus novel treatments that improve chance of cure in early-stage TNBC should be promptly integrated into standard of care paradigms. However, approximately 50% of patients with early TNBC will experience pCR with chemotherapy alone, and the addition of ICI carries the risk of sometimes permanent immune-related toxicities. This raises the critical question whether all early-stage TNBC patients should receive ICI in combination with neoadjuvant chemotherapy. As yet, there is no predictive biomarker to select patients most likely to benefit from ICI; however, it would seem that at least all node positive patients should receive an ICI with their neoadjuvant chemotherapy, on the basis of high clinical risk and potential to increase their pCR rate and ultimately the chance of cure. It is plausible that some lower-risk (stage I/II) TNBC demonstrating strong pre-existing immune activation (high tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) and/or PD-L1 expression) may be successfully treated with ICI in combination with less cytotoxic chemotherapy, and this requires further evaluation in clinical trials. The contribution of the adjuvant phase of ICI on clinical benefit is unclear even in patients who do not achieve a pCR and long-term data from ongoing studies without adjuvant ICI component may help inform us on an appropriate strategy in the short term. Similarly, the potential benefit of other adjuvant therapies in patients with poor response to neoadjuvant ICI with chemotherapy, including capecitabine and olaparib with or without ICI, is also unknown, but is rational on the basis of administering a non-cross-resistant anti-tumour agent. In conclusion, the addition of neoadjuvant ICI to chemotherapy significantly improves both the quality and quantity of the anti-tumour T cell response, suggesting that improvements in recurrence-free survival occur through better immune protection from cancer. In the future, development of ICI agents that target tumour-specific T cells may favourably alter the toxicity profile, improving the risk-benefit ratio for survivors.

Indexed as

Triple Negative Breast NeoplasmsHumansImmunotherapyLymphocytes, Tumor-InfiltratingNeoadjuvant TherapyNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalProgression-Free SurvivalEarly-stage triple-negative breast cancerImmune checkpoint inhibitorsNeoadjuvant therapyPD-1Tumour-infiltrating lymphocytes

Identifiers

PMID37222922
PMCPMC10356641
OpenAlexW4377940990

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.