ArticleCancer research and treatment2026
Adjuvant Chemotherapy in Breast Cancer after Neoadjuvant Therapy: Essential or Optional?
Article in Cancer research and treatment, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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
purposeThis study aimed to evaluate the impact of postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) on survival outcomes in breast cancer (BC) patients who have already undergone neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) followed by surgery. MATERIALS AND
methodsData from a population-based cohort (2010-2020) were analyzed for BC patients treated with NAC and surgery. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression identified prognostic factors for overall survival (OS), and a nomogram was developed and validated. Personalized scores from the nomogram were used for risk stratification to assess the effect of postoperative AC.
resultsA total of 15,921 BC patients were analyzed, with 11,144 in the training cohort and 4,777 in the validation cohort. The key prognostic indicators for OS included age, race, marital status, histological grade, BC subtype, T category, N category, type of surgery, and response to NAC (all p < 0.05). The nomogram effectively predicted individualized OS rates and stratified patients into various risk categories. Postoperative AC was found to significantly enhance OS in the high-risk subgroup (p=0.011 in the training cohort, p=0.012 in the overall population). However, for the low-risk subgroup, there was no significant survival benefit from postoperative AC (p=0.130 for the training cohort, p=0.588 for the overall population), suggesting that some patients might safely forgo unnecessary postoperative AC.
conclusionThis study efficiently differentiates between varying levels of risk, enabling clinicians to identify patients unlikely to benefit from postoperative AC and thus reduce the likelihood of overtreatment.
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.