ReviewThe Journal of pathology2025
Issues and missed opportunities in lymph node assessment after neoadjuvant chemotherapy.
Review in The Journal of pathology, 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.
- Zebrafish xenograft models as a fast platform for metastasis diagnosis and cisplatin response of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma.Animal models and experimental medicine · 2026Article
- 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Assessment of axillary lymph nodes in breast cancer patients following neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) is a crucial part of the clinical and pathological assessment of the disease and has prognostic and management implications. This, however, currently lacks standardisation and focuses only on the number of lymph nodes with metastases still present, the largest metastasis, and the presence of pathological complete response. Potential changes in any residual disease or within the lymph node parenchyma are not examined. Novel methods of more nuanced approaches are rare in the literature, even when considering multiple cancer types, but can offer an insight into the potential additional information to be gained and improvement in patient stratification. Given how common NACT is as the backbone of cancer therapy, there is a surprising lack of research into the lymph node response and determination of the biological factors driving what is seen histologically. Furthermore, with NACT now being administered alongside immunotherapy, there is an increasing need to understand the functional and architectural changes induced in the lymph nodes by metastatic tumour and systemic therapies. This review summarises current approaches, with breast cancer as an exemplar, and discusses the literature investigating a possible more granular approach to lymph node assessment after NACT. Translating these multiple carcinoma studies to breast cancer patients may prompt tissue-based research and, with clinical validation studies, changes to the reporting of lymph node response, for example percentage of viable tumour and immunological architectural features such as germinal centres. © 2025 The Author(s). The Journal of Pathology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of The Pathological Society of Great Britain and Ireland.
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.