ArticleRevista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetricia : revista da Federacao Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetricia2024
Real-world data on adjuvant capecitabine after standard neoadjuvant chemotherapy for triple negative breast cancer.
Article in Revista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetricia : revista da Federacao Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetricia, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Real-world clinical outcomes of patients with early-stage TNBC and BRCAm who were treated with adjuvant capecitabine in the United States.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2026Observational
- Adjuvant capecitabine in women with triple-negative breast cancer with residual disease after carboplatin-containing neoadjuvant chemotherapy.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2026Article
- Hot Topics in the Surgical Treatment of Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma: A Narrative Review of Current Managements.Cancers · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) has become the standard of care for patients with triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) with tumors > 1 cm or positive axillary nodes. Pathologic complete response (pCR) has been used as an endpoint to select patients for treatment scaling. This study aimed to examine the benefit of adding adjuvant capecitabine for TNBC patients who did not achieve pCR after standard NACT in a real-world scenario. Methods: This retrospective cohort study included all patients with TNBC who underwent NACT between 2010 and 2020. Clinicopathological data were obtained from the patient records. Univariate and multivariate analyses were conducted at the 5 years follow-up period. Results: We included 153 patients, more than half of whom had stage III (58.2%) and high-grade tumors (60.8%). The overall pCR rate was 34.6%, and 41% of the patients with residual disease received adjuvant capecitabine. Disease-specific survival (DSS) among the patients who achieved pCR was significantly higher (p<0.0001). Residual disease after NACT was associated with detrimental effects on DSS. In this cohort, we did not observe any survival benefit of adding adjuvant capecitabine for patients with TNBC subjected to NACT who did not achieve pCR (p=0.52). Conclusion: Our study failed to demonstrate a survival benefit of extended capecitabine therapy in patients with TNBC with residual disease after NACT. More studies are warranted to better understand the indication of systemic treatment escalation in this scenario.
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.