ArticleBreast (Edinburgh, Scotland)2025
Comparison of neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemotherapy for operable triple-negative breast cancer before the era of immune checkpoint inhibitors: A retrospective study from the Japanese National Clinical Database-Breast Cancer Registry.
Article in Breast (Edinburgh, Scotland), 2025. 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.
- Annual report of national clinical database-breast cancer registry in 2023: systemic therapy for small breast cancer.Breast cancer (Tokyo, Japan) · 2026Article
- Retrospective study of comparable survival after neoadjuvant versus adjuvant chemotherapy in cT1-2N0M0 triple-negative breast cancer.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2026Article
- Risk Factors and Prognosis Analysis of Infiltrating Micropapillary Carcinoma of Breast: A Retrospective Study.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
backgroundWhile neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) is recommended for stage II-III triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC), its equivalence to adjuvant chemotherapy (AdjC) has been questioned based on a retrospective study using the National Cancer Database in the United States, which lacked adjustment for important covariates. Given the unlikelihood of new randomized trials being conducted, well-designed, large-scale, retrospective studies are needed. PATIENTS AND
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed operable TNBC patients from the Japanese National Clinical Database- Breast Cancer Registry (2012-2016). Inclusion criteria were clinical stage I-IIIB, estrogen receptor (ER) < 10 %, progesterone receptor (PgR) < 10 %, and HER2-negative. We excluded patients with carcinoma in situ, cT4a/T4c/T4d, cN3, cM1, bilateral breast cancer, male, non-epithelial tumor, no chemotherapy, no surgery and no follow-up. Primary and secondary outcomes of overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) were compared between NAC and AdjC using Cox proportional Hazard regression among the exact matched cohort based on age, BMI, cT, cN, histology, ER/PgR positivity, chemotherapy regimen, breast operative technique, radiotherapy, and institution size.
resultsAmong 9,000 AdjC and 5,520 NAC patients, 3,256 matched cases were compared. OS and RFS were significantly worse for patients with NAC (Hazard Ratio 1.45 (95 % confidence interval 1.26-1.68) and 1.33 (1.19-1.49), respectively), particularly in patients <65 years, with stage II-IIIB, and with invasive ductal carcinoma.
conclusionPatients with NAC had worse prognosis, possibly due to unadjusted confounders. Although the availability of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) limits the clinical impact, the result could provide supplemental insights for treatment decisions in patients who are not candidates for ICIs.
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.