ArticleAmerican journal of translational research2024
Comparison of the effectiveness of neoadjuvant chemotherapy and adjuvant chemotherapy for improving prognosis in triple-negative breast cancer patients.
Article in American journal of translational research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo compare the effectiveness of surgery combined with neoadjuvant chemotherapy and radiotherapy (SNCR) versus surgery combined with adjuvant chemotherapy and radiotherapy (SACR) in improving the prognosis of triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) patients.
methodsClinical data from 112 TNBC patients treated between January 2014 and February 2019 were retrospectively collected. Data included clinical characteristics and 5-year disease-free survival (DFS). Kaplan-Meier (K-M) survival curves were used to analyze the associations of various factors with DFS. Lasso-Cox regression was used to screen significant variables identified by K-M survival analysis. Multivariate Cox regression was used to determine independent prognostic factors affecting DFS.
resultsK-M survival analysis showed that treatment regimen (P=0.012), TNM (tumor, node, metastasis) staging (P=0.049), N staging (P=0.015), P53 (P=0.015), KI-67 (P=0.002), neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) (P<0.001), platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR) (P<0.001), and cancer antigen 153 (CA153) (P<0.001) were associated with DFS in TNBC patients. Lasso-Cox regression analysis identified treatment regimen, TNM stage, P53, KI-67, NLR, PLR, and CA153 as features related to DFS when λ=0.053741 (1se). Multivariate Cox regression analysis revealed that treatment regimen (P<0.001, 95% CI: 2.309-14.396, HR=5.765), P53 (P=0.010, 95% CI: 1.315-7.864, HR=3.216), and NLR (P=0.001, 95% CI: 2.098-14.553, HR=5.525) were independent prognostic factors affecting DFS. A nomogram model was constructed, and time-dependent receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis showed that the model's areas under the curve (AUC) for predicting 1-, 3-, and 5-year DFS were 0.928, 0.816, and 0.665, respectively.
conclusionThe SNCR regimen significantly improves DFS in patients with stage IIb to IIIa TNBC compared to the traditional SACR regimen.
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.