ArticleWorld journal of surgical oncology2024
De-escalation of neoadjuvant taxane and carboplatin therapy in HER2-positive breast cancer with dual HER2 blockade: a multicenter real-world experience in China.
Article in World journal of surgical oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparison of neoadjuvant TCbHP versus THP in HER2-positive breast cancer: a retrospective cohort study.Gland surgery · 2026Article
- Pathological complete response to neoadjuvant TACHP in HER2-positive/HR-positive inflammatory breast cancer: a case report.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Efficacy, safety, and biomarkers of neoadjuvant trastuzumab and pertuzumab combined with chemotherapy in Chinese patients with HER2-positive breast cancer: a multicenter retrospective cohort study.International journal of surgery (London, England) · 2026Article
- Ribosomal RNA Degradation (RNA Disruption) in Tumour Cells: Mechanistic Insights and Potential Clinical Utility.Cancers · 2025Review
- Optimizing neoadjuvant treatment in HER2-positive breast cancer: the role of HER2, HR, PD-L1 expression and regimen selection.Future oncology (London, England) · 2025Article
- Chinese expert consensus on clinical diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer targeting HER2.Translational breast cancer research : a journal focusing on translational research in breast cancer · 2025Review
- Chinese Society of Clinical Oncology Breast Cancer (CSCO BC) Guidelines in 2024: International Contributions from China.Cancer biology & medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTCbHP (taxane + carboplatin + trastuzumab + pertuzumab) is the preferred neoadjuvant therapy regimen for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive breast cancer. However, no consensus exists regarding whether specific populations may be exempt from carboplatin, allowing for de-escalation to the THP (taxane + trastuzumab + pertuzumab) regimen. Additionally, the optimal number of cycles for neoadjuvant THP remains unclear. We compared the efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant TCbHP and THP regimens, providing clinicians with a nuanced perspective to guide their treatment regimen selection.
methodsThis multicenter real-world study included patients with HER2-positive breast cancer undergoing neoadjuvant TCbHP or THP between March 2019 and February 2023. Efficacy was assessed through the pathological complete response (pCR) rate, while safety was evaluated through monitoring adverse events.
resultsAmong 220 patients, 103 received 6 cycles of TCbHP (TCbHP×6), 83 received 6 cycles of THP (THP×6), and 34 received 4 cycles of THP (THP×4). The TCbHP×6 cohort exhibited a 66% pCR rate compared with 53% in the THP×6 cohort (P = 0.072). Subgroup analysis revealed that in patients aged ≤ 50 years, those with hormone receptor (HR)-negative status, and those with clinical stage T2, the pCR rate of the TCbHP×6 regimen was significantly higher than the THP×6 regimen (P < 0.05). The TCbHP×6 cohort reported higher frequencies of any-grade adverse events (99% versus 86.7%) and grade 3-4 events (49.5% versus 12%) than the THP×6 cohort. Propensity score matching identified 27 patient pairs between the THP×6 and THP×4 cohorts, indicating a significantly higher pCR rate for the THP×6 regimen than the THP×4 regimen (63% versus 29.6%, P = 0.029).
conclusionsThe TCbHP×6 regimen is favored for individuals aged ≤ 50 years and those aged > 50, ≤60 years with HR-negative status or clinical stage T2-4. For patients in compromised general condition or lacking the specified indications, the THP×6 regimen emerges as a lower-toxicity alternative with satisfactory efficacy. To ensure treatment efficacy, a minimum of 6 cycles of neoadjuvant THP is required.
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.