ArticleScientific reports2025
Long-term survival outcomes of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in stage II-III HR+/HER2- breast cancer.
Article in Scientific reports, 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.
- Review
- Survival benefit of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in HR+/HER2- early breast cancer stratified by luminal B status and clinical risk: a real-world cohort study in a Chinese population.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Long-term outcomes for neoadjuvant versus adjuvant chemotherapy in operable breast cancer patients with hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative.Frontiers in oncology · 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
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Breast cancer is the most common malignant tumor among women worldwide. Hormone receptor-positive/HER2-negative (HR+/HER2-) breast cancer is the largest subgroup among these cases. The application of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) has rapidly increased in recent years, but its impact on long-term survival in HR+/HER2- breast cancer remains debated. This retrospective cohort study analyzed 21,299 stage II-III HR+/HER2- breast cancer patients from the SEER database (2010-2021), employing propensity score matching (PSM) to balance intergroup differences. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and Cox proportional hazards regression were used to identify significant prognostic factors. Among 21,299 patients, 17.8% received NACT. After propensity score matching (PSM; n = 6,930), the NACT group still showed poorer OS (5-year 83.7% vs. 89.6%; 10-year 69.9% vs. 76.7%; P < 0.001) and BCSS (85.9% vs. 91.6%; 10-year 75.3% vs. 81.8%; P < 0.001). Multivariate analysis confirmed NACT as an independent risk factor for mortality (HR 1.44, 95% CI 1.30-1.59, p < 0.001). Notably, achieving Pathological Complete Response (pCR) (17.3% of NACT patients) did not improve survival, while non-pCR patients had worse outcomes than adjuvant chemotherapy (ACT) recipients (OS HR 1.58, BCSS HR 1.68, p < 0.001). Stratified analyses revealed consistent survival disadvantages for NACT in stage IIB-IIIC, T1-T3, and N0-N2 subgroups. For stage III patients undergoing Breast-Conserving Surgery(BCS), NACT was associated with significantly lower OS and BCSS compared to ACT. NACT in stage II-III HR+/HER2- breast cancer is associated with inferior long-term survival outcomes compared to ACT, particularly in patients with T1-T3 tumors or N0-N2 lymph node involvement. While NACT may enhance BCS rates, its use should be cautiously weighed against potential survival trade-offs. These findings highlight the need for personalized treatment strategies and further validation through prospective trials, especially given the limitations of retrospective SEER data.
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.