ArticleAnnals of surgical oncology2023
Overall Survival Following Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy Versus Adjuvant Chemotherapy in Clinically Node Negative T1 Triple Negative Breast Cancer.
Article in Annals of surgical oncology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Ki-67 expression and rates of pathologic complete response in T1cN0M0 triple-negative breast cancer: a national cancer database analysis.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2026Article
- Retrospective study of comparable survival after neoadjuvant versus adjuvant chemotherapy in cT1-2N0M0 triple-negative breast cancer.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2026Article
- Guidance for Canadian Breast Cancer Practice: National Consensus Recommendations for the Systemic Treatment of Patients with Triple Negative Breast Cancer in Both the Early and Metastatic Setting 2025.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2026Article
- Axillary dissection is avoidable in most cT1N0 triple-negative & HER2+ breast cancers treated with upfront surgery.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2025Article
- Use and Benefit of Neoadjuvant Versus Adjuvant Chemotherapy in Node-Negative, T1 Triple Negative Breast Cancer.Clinical breast cancer · 2025Article
- Effect of chemotherapy timing in triple-negative breast cancer: a real-world evidence study.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2025Article
- Comparing survival outcomes between neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemotherapy within hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative early breast cancer among young women (≤35): a retrospective cohort study based on SEER database and TJMUCH registry.American journal of cancer research · 2025Article
- Vacuum-assisted excision: one-step approach to the diagnosis and percutaneous treatment of small early breast cancer (the VAE-BREAST 01 study protocol).Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- Size matters: a review of the challenges in and importance of multimodal approaches to the management of patients with small, node-negative, triple-negative breast cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe purpose of this study was to compare the overall survival (OS) of upfront surgery followed by adjuvant chemotherapy (ACT) versus neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) followed by surgery in patients with clinical T1 clinically node negative triple negative breast cancer (TNBC). PATIENTS AND
methodsWe retrospectively reviewed 48,329 women with cT1N0 TNBC from 2006 to 2016 in the National Cancer Database (NCDB). Patients were categorized into five pathologic subgroups based on ACT versus NACT and definitive pathologic stage after surgery: ACT with unchanged stage (pT0-1N0), ACT with pathologic upstage (any nodal disease, > pT1N0), NACT with pCR (ypT0-isN0), NACT with stable disease (SD) (ypT1N0), and NACT with progressive disease (PD) (any nodal disease, > ypT1N0). The primary outcome was 5 year OS.
resultsPatients with TNBC who underwent upfront surgery followed by ACT had better OS compared with those who received NACT (p < 0.001). The hazard ratio (HR) for death for NACT compared with ACT was 1.42 (95% CI 1.26-1.59, p < 0.001) on multivariate analysis. Patients who underwent upfront surgery followed by ACT and whose pathological stage was unchanged from clinical stage had similar outcomes compared with those who received NACT and attained pCR with 5 year OS of 92.7% versus 93.3% (p = 0.34). Patients with clinical T1cN0 tumors who underwent NACT with pCR had better outcomes compared with those who underwent ACT with unchanged stages. (p = 0.025).
conclusionsFor cT1N0 TNBC patients, OS of upfront surgery followed by ACT was not inferior to those who underwent NACT. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy was associated with better outcomes in cT1c patients who attained pCR.
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.