ReviewCancers2025
De-Escalating Anticancer Treatment: Watch Your Step.
Review in Cancers, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Global Trends in Surgical Oncology Deescalation Phase III Randomized Trials.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Article
- Hypofractionated radiotherapy across cancer sites: a narrative review of evidence and implementation.Japanese journal of clinical oncology · 2026Review
- Pediatric Hepatoblastoma: From Developmental Molecular Mechanisms to Innovative Therapeutic Strategies.Cancers · 2026Review
- Profiles of research waste in randomized clinical trials comparing de-escalation and escalation strategies for breast cancer treatment.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- The Three Musketeers in Cancer Therapy: Pharmacokinetics, Pharmacodynamics and Personalised Approach.Journal of personalized medicine · 2025Review
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
The concept of "more is better" has long dominated cancer treatment, emphasizing aggressive therapies despite their toxicity. However, the rise of personalized medicine has fostered treatment de-escalation strategies aimed at minimizing toxicity, improving quality of life, and reducing costs. This position paper highlights key applications of de-escalation in medical oncology, with a primary focus on breast cancer and notable examples in colorectal, head and neck, ovarian, lung, and prostate cancers. Various approaches, including dose reduction, treatment duration shortening, and regimen optimization, have demonstrated efficacy without compromising clinical outcomes. Advances in molecular diagnostics, such as Oncotype Dx in breast cancer and circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) analysis in colorectal cancer, have facilitated patient selection for de-escalation. While these strategies present promising results, challenges remain, particularly in balancing treatment intensity with oncologic control. The review underscores the need for further prospective trials to refine de-escalation approaches and ensure their safe integration into standard oncologic care.
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.