ArticleScientific reports2025
Impact of neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemotherapy on breast cancer prognosis in a propensity score matched population.
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 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Surgery-first versus neoadjuvant chemotherapy in stage I (cT1c) triple-negative breast cancer: A critical reappraisal.Breast (Edinburgh, Scotland) · 2026Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Breast cancer is the most common cancer among women worldwide. To evaluate the real-world effectiveness of Neo-adjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) and adjuvant chemotherapy (ACT), we conducted a retrospective study comparing their impact on breast cancer prognosis. We retrieved data from the SEER database. We applied propensity score matching (PSM) to minimize confounding factors. Breast-cancer specific survival (BCSS) and overall survival (OS) were compared between the two groups. We also developed a nomogram prognostic model using clinicopathological parameters to predict survival rates. We identified 46,447 eligible patients in the SEER database. After PSM, 9,025 patients were included in each group, with 11,762 patients receiving NACT and 34,685 undergoing ACT before PSM. In the PSM cohort, the 5-year BCSS and OS were 88.3% (95% CI: 87.6-89.0%) and 85.7% (95% CI: 84.9-86.5%) for the NACT group, respectively. Notably, patients in the ACT group showed significantly better survival prognosis compared to those in the NACT group. We also developed nomograms to predict the 3-year, 5-year, and 8-year OS and BCSS rates for patients receiving NACT or ACT. Breast cancer patients who undergo surgery followed by ACT have a more favorable prognosis compared to those receiving NACT before surgery.
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.