Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37399094›Full record

ArticleJournal of the National Cancer Institute2023

Effect of treatment interruptions on overall survival in patients with triple-negative breast cancer.

Ronald Chow, Shaakir Hasan, J Isabelle Choi, Jana Fox, Arpit M Chhabra, Deborah C Marshall, Richard L Bakst, Charles B Simone

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.5field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Quantifying and addressing self-defined needs in cancer patients.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2025
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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

8 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Ronald ChowDepartment of Radiation Oncology, New York Proton Center, New York, NY, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-6195-8624
Shaakir HasanDepartment of Radiation Oncology, New York Proton Center, New York, NY, USA.
J Isabelle ChoiDepartment of Radiation Oncology, New York Proton Center, New York, NY, USA.
Jana FoxDepartment of Radiation Oncology, New York Proton Center, New York, NY, USA.
Arpit M ChhabraDepartment of Radiation Oncology, New York Proton Center, New York, NY, USA.
Deborah C MarshallDepartment of Radiation Oncology, New York Proton Center, New York, NY, USA.
Richard L BakstDepartment of Radiation Oncology, New York Proton Center, New York, NY, USA.
Charles B SimoneDepartment of Radiation Oncology, New York Proton Center, New York, NY, USA.
Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center · USMount Sinai Medical Center · USAlbert Einstein College of Medicine · US

Funding

X-RAY CRYSTALLOGRAPHYP30CA008748 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RES · PI Hongbiao Carl Lekaye · 1985 to 2026
$347.4M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA008748
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionCurrently, there are no data regarding the impact of treatment interruptions during radiotherapy for breast cancer. In this study, we examine the correlation between treatment interruptions during radiotherapy and outcomes in triple-negative breast cancer patients.

methodsA total of 35 845 patients with triple-negative breast cancer treated between 2010 and 2014 were identified and analyzed from the National Cancer Database. The number of interrupted radiotherapy treatment days was calculated as the difference between the total elapsed days from the start to end of radiation treatment (both initial treatment and boost treatment, when boost was administered) and the total number of expected treatment days, defined as the number of expected treatment days with an addition of 2 weekend days for every multiple of 5 treatment days. Binomial multivariate regression analysis was used to detect correlates of treatment interruptions, and propensity-score matched multivariable Cox proportional hazard models were used to evaluate the association between treatment interruption and overall survival (OS).

resultsWhen modeled as a continuous variable, longer treatment duration was associated with poorer OS (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.023, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.015 to 1.031). In reference to 0-1 days of interruption, patients with 2-5 interrupted days (HR = 1.069, 95% CI = 1.002 to 1.140 interrupted days), 6-10 interrupted days (HR = 1.239, 95% CI = 1.140 to 1.348 interrupted days), and 11-15 interrupted days (HR = 1.265, 95% CI = 1.126 to 1.431 interrupted days) experienced increasing likelihood of mortality.

conclusionIn the first study of its kind, we report a correlation between treatment interruptions during adjuvant radiotherapy in triple-negative breast cancer and OS.

Indexed as

Triple Negative Breast NeoplasmsHumansMastectomy, SegmentalNeoplasm StagingProportional Hazards ModelsRadiotherapy, AdjuvantRetrospective StudiesTime Factors

Identifiers

PMID37399094
PMCPMC10483262
OpenAlexW4382930923

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.