ArticleThe Journal of surgical research2024
Assessment of Treatment Sequence in Patients With Stage III Breast Cancer.
Article in The Journal of surgical research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Locally Ablative Therapies in Oligometastatic Breast Cancer.JAMA surgery · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionStage III breast cancer is defined as locally advanced breast cancer and is treated with curative intent. Historically, overall survival (OS) did not differ based on treatment sequence (neoadjuvant chemotherapy [NAC] followed by surgery versus surgery followed by chemotherapy). Given recent advancements, we examined if treatment sequence may be associated with improved OS in a contemporary cohort of patients with stage III breast cancer.
methodsPatients aged 18-80 years with prognostic stage III breast cancer who received chemotherapy and surgery were selected from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. Patients were stratified by treatment sequence (NAC versus surgery first). Unadjusted OS and breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared with log-rank tests. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate the association of treatment sequence with OS and BCSS after adjustment for selected covariates.
resultsThe study included 26,573 patients; median follow-up was 62.0 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 61.0-63.0). Patients receiving NAC had a worse OS and BCSS compared to those who underwent surgery first (5-year OS rates 0.66 versus 0.73; 5-year BCSS rates 0.70 versus 0.77; both log-rank P < 0.001). After adjustment for tumor subtype, receipt of NAC (versus surgery first) remained associated with a worse OS (hazard ratio 1.27, 95% CI 1.2-1.34, P < 0.001) and BCSS (hazard ratio 1.35, 95% CI 1.27-1.43, P < 0.001).
conclusionsBased on data from patients treated largely before 2020, undergoing surgery first may be associated with improved survival, even after adjustment for known covariates including tumor subtype. These findings may inform treatment when caring for patients with operable, locally advanced breast cancer.
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.