Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39856787›Full record

ArticleBreast cancer research : BCR2025

Prediction of pathological complete response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for HER2-negative breast cancer patients with routine immunohistochemical markers.

Lothar Häberle, Ramona Erber, Paul Gass, Alexander Hein, Melitta Niklos, Bernhard Volz, Carolin C Hack, Rüdiger Schulz-Wendtland, Hanna Huebner, Chloë Goossens and 10 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Breast cancer research : BCR, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. [Artificial intelligence in predicting pathological complete response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer: current advances and challenges].Sheng wu yi xue gong cheng xue za zhi = Journal of biomedical engineering = Shengwu yixue gongchengxue zazhi · 2025
    Review
  8. NeoadjuvantCancers · 2025
    Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

20 authors.

Lothar HäberleDepartment of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Erlangen University Hospital, Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN, Friedrich Alexander University of Erlangen-Nuremberg, Erlangen, Germany. lothar.haeberle@uk-erlangen.de.
Ramona ErberInstitute of Pathology, Erlangen University Hospital, Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN, Friedrich Alexander University of Erlangen-Nuremberg, Erlangen, Germany.
Paul GassDepartment of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Erlangen University Hospital, Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN, Friedrich Alexander University of Erlangen-Nuremberg, Erlangen, Germany.
Alexander HeinDepartment of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Erlangen University Hospital, Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN, Friedrich Alexander University of Erlangen-Nuremberg, Erlangen, Germany.
Melitta NiklosDepartment of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Erlangen University Hospital, Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN, Friedrich Alexander University of Erlangen-Nuremberg, Erlangen, Germany.
Bernhard VolzDepartment of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Erlangen University Hospital, Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN, Friedrich Alexander University of Erlangen-Nuremberg, Erlangen, Germany.
Carolin C HackDepartment of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Erlangen University Hospital, Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN, Friedrich Alexander University of Erlangen-Nuremberg, Erlangen, Germany.
Rüdiger Schulz-WendtlandInstitute of Diagnostic Radiology, Erlangen University Hospital, Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN, Friedrich Alexander University of Erlangen-Nuremberg, Erlangen, Germany.
Hanna HuebnerDepartment of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Erlangen University Hospital, Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN, Friedrich Alexander University of Erlangen-Nuremberg, Erlangen, Germany.
Chloë GoossensDepartment of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Erlangen University Hospital, Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN, Friedrich Alexander University of Erlangen-Nuremberg, Erlangen, Germany.
Matthias ChristgenInstitute of Pathology, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany.
Thilo DörkGynecology Research Unit, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany.
Tjoung-Won Park-SimonDepartment of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany.
Andreas SchneeweissNational Center for Tumor Diseases, University Hospital and German Cancer Research Center, Heidelberg, Germany.
Michael UntchDepartment of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Helios Clinic Berlin-Buch, Berlin, Germany.
Valentina NekljudovaGerman Breast Group, Neu-Isenburg, Germany.
Sibylle LoiblGerman Breast Group, Neu-Isenburg, Germany.
Arndt HartmannInstitute of Pathology, Erlangen University Hospital, Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN, Friedrich Alexander University of Erlangen-Nuremberg, Erlangen, Germany.
Matthias W BeckmannDepartment of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Erlangen University Hospital, Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN, Friedrich Alexander University of Erlangen-Nuremberg, Erlangen, Germany.
Peter A FaschingDepartment of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Erlangen University Hospital, Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN, Friedrich Alexander University of Erlangen-Nuremberg, Erlangen, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPathological complete response (pCR) is an established surrogate marker for prognosis in patients with breast cancer (BC) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Individualized pCR prediction based on clinical information available at biopsy, particularly immunohistochemical (IHC) markers, may help identify patients who could benefit from preoperative chemotherapy.

methodsData from patients with HER2-negative BC who underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy from 2002 to 2020 (n = 1166) were used to develop multivariable prediction models to estimate the probability of pCR (pCR-prob). The most precise model identified using cross-validation was implemented in an online calculator and a nomogram. Associations among pCR-prob, prognostic IHC3 distant recurrence and disease-free survival were studied using Cox regression and Kaplan-Meier analyses. The model's utility was further evaluated in independent external validation cohorts.

results273 patients (23.4%) achieved a pCR. The most precise model had across-validated area under the curve (AUC) of 0.84, sensitivity of 0.82, and specificity of 0.71. External validation yielded AUCs between 0.75 (95% CI, 0.70-0.81) and 0.83 (95% CI, 0.78-0.87). The higher the pCR-prob, the greater the prognostic impact of pCR status (presence/absence): hazard ratios decreased from 0.55 (95% central range, 0.07-1.77) at 0% to 0.20 (0.11-0.31) at 50% pCR-prob. Combining pCR-prob and IHC3 score further improved the precision of disease-free survival prognosis.

conclusionsA pCR prediction model for neoadjuvant therapy decision-making was established. Combining pCR and recurrence prediction allows identification of not only patients who benefit most from neoadjuvant chemotherapy, but also patients with a very unfavorable prognosis for whom alternative treatment strategies should be considered.

Indexed as

Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsBiomarkers, TumorBreast NeoplasmsErb-b2 Receptor Tyrosine KinasesNeoadjuvant TherapyAdultAgedChemotherapy, AdjuvantFemaleHumansImmunohistochemistryKaplan-Meier EstimateMiddle AgedNomogramsPrognosisRetrospective StudiesBiomarkers, TumorERBB2 protein, humanErb-b2 Receptor Tyrosine KinasesBreast cancerClinical dataImmunohistochemistryNeoadjuvant chemotherapypCRPrediction model

Identifiers

PMID39856787
PMCPMC11759445

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.