Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38472501›Full record

ArticleArchives of gynecology and obstetrics2024

Feasibility of targeted therapies in the adjuvant setting of early breast cancer in men: real-world data from a population-based registry.

M L Frevert, D Dannehl, L Jansen, S Hermann, H Schäffler, S Huwer, W Janni, I Juhasz-Böss, A D Hartkopf, F-A Taran

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Archives of gynecology and obstetrics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
4.3field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Therapy of early breast cancer: current status and perspectives.Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2025
    Review
  7. Review
  8. 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

10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

M L Frevert *Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Medical Center Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Hugstetter Str. 55, 79106, Freiburg, Germany. marie.louise.frevert@uniklinik-freiburg.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6497-7051
D Dannehl *Department of Women's Health, Tuebingen University Hospital, Tuebingen, Germany.
L JansenEpidemiological Cancer Registry of Baden-Württemberg, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany.
S HermannEpidemiological Cancer Registry of Baden-Württemberg, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany.
H SchäfflerDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Clinic Ulm, Faculty of Medicine, University of Ulm, Ulm, Germany.
S HuwerDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Medical Center Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Hugstetter Str. 55, 79106, Freiburg, Germany.
W JanniDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Clinic Ulm, Faculty of Medicine, University of Ulm, Ulm, Germany.
I Juhasz-BössDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Medical Center Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Hugstetter Str. 55, 79106, Freiburg, Germany.
A D Hartkopf *Department of Women's Health, Tuebingen University Hospital, Tuebingen, Germany.
F-A Taran *Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Medical Center Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Hugstetter Str. 55, 79106, Freiburg, Germany.
University of Freiburg · DEGerman Cancer Research Center · DEUniversität Ulm · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFollowing the positive iDFS and OS results of the phase III clinical trials monarchE, NATALEE and OlympiA, new oral anticancer agents (the CDK4/6 inhibitors abemaciclib, ribociclib as well as the PARP inhibitor olaparib) have recently been introduced into the treatment of high-risk early breast cancer (eBC). However, only few male patients were included in these trials (0.4%, 0.6% and 0.3%, respectively). The objective of this real-world analysis was to determine the proportion of male patients with eBC fulfilling the clinical high-risk criteria of above-mentioned trials. PATIENTS AND

methodsWe conducted a data inquiry and analysis with the Cancer Registry of Baden-Württemberg of men with breast cancer diagnosed between January 1, 2015 and December 31, 2021. Men with eBC were identified and the number of patients at clinical high-risk according to the inclusion criteria of monarchE, NATALEE and OlympiA was assessed.

resultsOf 397 men with eBC, 354 (89.1%) had a HR + /Her2- and 4 (1.0%) a triple-negative subtype. 84 patients (21.2%) met the clinical high-risk criteria according to the monarchE, 189 (47.6%) those according to the NATALEE and 50 (12.6%) those according to the OlympiA trial.

conclusionIn a large real-world sample, more men with eBC are at clinical high risk according to the inclusion criteria of monarchE, NATALEE and OlympiA than would be expected in women. This is most likely due to more advanced stages at initial diagnosis in men. To evaluate whether CDK4/6 and PARP inhibitors improve prognosis also in men should be the topic of future real- world analyses.

Indexed as

Breast Neoplasms, MaleFeasibility StudiesRegistriesAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAminopyridinesAntineoplastic AgentsBenzimidazolesChemotherapy, AdjuvantHumansMaleMiddle AgedMolecular Targeted TherapyPoly(ADP-ribose) Polymerase InhibitorsPurinesabemaciclibAminopyridinesAntineoplastic AgentsBenzimidazolesPoly(ADP-ribose) Polymerase InhibitorsPurinesribociclibCDK 4/6 inhibitorsMale breast cancermonarchENATALEEOlympiASystemic therapy

Identifiers

PMID38472501
PMCPMC11147886
OpenAlexW4392679080

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.