SynthesisBMC cancer2024
Comparison of neoadjuvant single-agent treatment and dual-HER2 blockade for breast-conserving surgery conversion in HER2-positive breast cancer: a meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC cancer, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNeoadjuvant targeted therapy has shown that improve pathologic complete response and facilitate breast-conserving surgery, but the difference between single-agent treatment or dual-HER2 blockade to the conversion of breast-conserving surgery has not been well described.
methodsVia the systematic literature search of PubMed, Web of Science and Cochrane Library databases, 5 eligible studies used to perform this meta-analysis, which was carried out using RevMan version 5.4.
resultsA total of 1306 patients from five randomized controlled trials were included in the analysis, revealing a significant increase in the conversion rate to breast-conserving surgery with neoadjuvant targeted therapy (OR 0.30, 95% CI 0.15-0.57; p = 0.0003). The odds ratio (OR) for single-agent treatment compared to dual-HER2 blockade was 1.04 (95% CI 0.73-1.48; p = 0.82). For pathological complete response (pCR), the OR for single-HER2 blockade versus dual-HER2 blockade was 0.43 (95% CI 0.34-0.55; p = 0.01), and for clinical response, it was 0.81 (95% CI 0.59-1.10; p = 0.17). The OR for serious adverse events between single-HER2 and dual-HER2 blockade was 0.72 (95% CI 0.55-0.95; p = 0.02). The risk ratio (RR) for pCR and the shift from mastectomy to BCS was 1.16 (95% CI 0.78-1.72; p = 0.47), while for clinical response and the shift from mastectomy to BCS, it was 2.40 (95% CI 1.44-4.01; p = 0.0008).
conclusionNeoadjuvant targeted treatment obviously promote the actual implementation rate of breast-conserving surgery, nevertheless, there was no statistically significant increase in single-agent treatment versus dual-HER2 blockade.
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.