ArticleCancers2025
A Retrospective, Single-Center Study Comparing Neoadjuvant ACTHP vs. DCbHP in HER2-Positive Early Breast Cancer Patients.
Article in Cancers, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Tumors >2 cm in node-negative, HER2-positive breast cancer: comparing neoadjuvant dual-targeted versus adjuvant single-targeted treatment pathways in real-world practice.Therapeutic advances in medical oncology · 2026Article
- Bridging Clinical Trials to Real-World Clinical Practice: TCHP Neoadjuvant Therapy Outcomes in HER2-Positive Breast Cancer.Breast cancer (Dove Medical Press) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNeoadjuvant systemic therapy is the preferred treatment approach for stage II-III HER2-positive breast cancer (BC). Real-life data comparing regimens with or without anthracyclines combined with two HER2 drugs is lacking. We compared the efficacy and toxicity of two commonly used regimens.
methodsRetrospective data were collected on patients newly diagnosed with clinical stage II-III HER2-positive BC and treated at Sheba Medical Center, Israel, between September 2017 and June 2022 with either neoadjuvant DCbHP (docetaxel, carboplatin, trastuzumab, pertuzumab) or ACTHP (doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, paclitaxel trastuzumab pertuzumab). PCR (pathological complete response) (ypT0/isN0) was evaluated in both cohorts and according to HER2 immunohistochemistry (IHC) staining (3+ or 2+ and fluorescence in situ hybridization [FISH] positive), estrogen receptor (ER), tumor size and nodal status. The toxicity indices evaluated were reductions in left ventricle ejection fraction (LVEF), dose reductions, hospitalizations and febrile neutropenia.
resultsHere, 106 received ACTHP and 73 received DCbHP. Median age at diagnosis, ER status, HER2 IHC (2+/FISH pos or 3+) and nodal status were balanced. PCR occurred in 63.1% of patients, 67.0% and 57.5% in the ACTHP and DCbHP groups, respectively (
conclusionsPCR rates were similar overall between ACTHP and DCbHP; however, in the HER2 3+ subgroup, ACTHP demonstrated increased efficacy. DCbHP was significantly less cardiotoxic.
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.