ArticleThe oncologist2025
Clinicopathological evaluation of triple-negative breast cancer treated with keynote-522 regimen.
Article in The oncologist, 2025. 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.
- Dual Role of LBH589 in Triple-Negative Breast Cancer: Inhibition of Tumor Growth and Enhancement of Antitumor Immunity.Cancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.) · 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
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundOur objective is to compare the response rate between two matched cohorts of early-stage TNBC (chemotherapy: CT + immune checkpoint inhibitor: ICI vs CT alone) and to define clinicopathological variables to identify a subgroup of patients who could be spared or benefit from ICI.
methodsPatients treated with CT + ICI according to KEYNOTE-522 (KN-522) (n = 128) were included in the study and matched 1:1 with patients treated with CT alone. Matching criteria included age range (10 years), race, clinical stage (c)-AJCC, and histological type (metaplastic [MpBC] vs no special type [IC-NST]). The following histological characteristics in the core needle biopsy (CNB) were included: histological type, Nottingham grade, degree of necrosis, and percentage of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs). The residual cancer burden (RCB) was categorized into 0 (pCR), I, II, or III. To identify a subgroup of patients who could be spared or benefit from adding ICI, an analysis of the penalized maximum likelihood estimate was performed.
resultspCR was achieved in 50% of patients treated with CT + ICI vs 35.9% treated with CT alone (P = .02). In the CT group, lower TILs in CNB, non-Black race, MpBC histology, and a higher degree of necrosis were associated with non-pCR. Patients were categorized into quartiles (Q) based on the predicted risk of non-pCR to CT (Q1 represents the lowest risk and Q4 represents the highest risk of non-pCR). In Q4, the pCR rate with CT alone was only 2.9% (1/46) vs 20% (6/64) in the CT + IT cohort (P = .044). The following variables were associated with Q4 vs Q1-3: non-Black race (96.9% vs 88%, P = .04), MpBC histology (29.7% vs 1.6%, P < .01), lymph node positive disease (54.6% vs 50%, P < .01), Nottingham grade 2 (32.8% vs 6.3%, P < .01), and lower mean TILs (12.8 ± 15 vs 36.7 ± 26.5, P < .01).
conclusionsThe efficacy of CT + ICI regimen in the real world, although higher than CT, is lower than that observed on the KN 522 clinical trial. Our results need validation in a larger cohort.
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.