ArticleFrontiers in oncology2025
Real-world data analysis of adjuvant capecitabine for triple-negative breast cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Evaluate real-world outcomes in three cohorts of patients with early-stage triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC): (1) patients who achieved pathological complete response (pCR); (2) patients without pCR who didn't receive adjuvant chemotherapy; and (3) patients without pCR who received adjuvant capecitabine. Methods: Retrospective cross-sectional study from two hospitals in Málaga. Patients with TNBC received standard NAC followed by surgery. Between 2004 and 2015, patients not achieving pCR received no further systemic therapy. From 2015 onward, these patients were treated with adjuvant capecitabine. Kaplan-Meier and log-rank tests were used to compare disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). Results: A total of 312 patients were included in the study. 133 achieved pCR, 84 patients didn't achieve pCR and didn't receive adjuvant capecitabine and 95 patients didn't reach pCR and received adjuvant capecitabine. 89 patients experienced recurrence and 70 patients died. Patients who achieved pCR had a significantly higher DFS (HR 0.21 CI95% 0.12-0.36, p<0.0001) and higher overall survival (HR 0.27 CI95% 0.15-0.49, p<0.0001) compared to those who didn't. Statistically significant differences in DFS and OS were observed among the three cohorts (DFS: p<0.00001; OS: p=0.00005). However, no statistically significant differences were found between cohorts 2 and 3 in terms of DFS (p=0.94) or OS (p=0.34). Conclusions: Patients who achieved pCR had better outcomes compared to those who didn't. Among patients who didn't achieve pCR, the addition of capecitabine didn't result in significant improvements in DFS or OS compared to those who didn't receive adjuvant treatment.
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.