ArticleDiscover oncology2025
Visualization of research trend of neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer treatment: a bibliometric analysis.
Article in Discover oncology, 2025. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeNeoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) is a cornerstone in the treatment of breast cancer, aimed at shrinking tumors preoperatively and improving surgical outcomes. Although the literature volume has shown an annual growth trend, no comprehensive bibliometric and clinical analysis covering multiple databases in this field is available. The study aims to identify key contributions to the field and provide insights for future research directions.
methodsThe articles were obtained from the Web of Science Core Collection (WoSCC) on breast cancer in the past decades (from 1999 to 2024). VOSviewer 1.6.17, CiteSpace 5.8.R.1 and package "bibliometrix" were used to conduct this bibliometric analysis.
resultsWe included 11,505 articles and the top 100 cited journals from WOSCC for analysis. The USA had the highest number of publications, and most of the top 100 cited articles were from the USA. Sibylle Loibl, Michael Untch, and Von Minckwitz G have made significant contributions through their high research productivity and the publication of high-quality articles; Von M was the most cited author from the top 100 cited journals. Keyword co-occurrence studies suggested that the research hotspots in the field of NAC for breast cancer focus on survival rate, preoperative chemotherapy, and overall treatment strategy. Increased clinical trials and randomized trials on preoperative chemotherapy and the use of positron emission tomography, especially for triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC), have attracted wide attention and research in the academic community over a specific period.
conclusionThis study presents a bibliometric analysis on NAC for breast cancer, highlighting research trends, influential studies, and collaborative networks. This data analysis highlights key research gaps in NAC for breast cancer, including limited international collaboration, underexplored treatment strategies for aggressive subtypes like TNBC, and the need for more high-quality trials to optimize personalization and response prediction.
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.