SynthesisBreast cancer research and treatment2026
Diagnostic accuracy of tumor bed biopsy for predicting pathological complete response in breast cancer patients achieving clinical complete response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy: a meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Breast cancer research and treatment, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Eliminating breast cancer surgery in exceptional responders: selective omission - not blind omission.Breast cancer research and treatment · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeWith growing interest in surgical de-escalation for breast cancer, tumor bed biopsy (TBB) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) has been proposed as a tool to predict pathological complete response (pCR). This meta-analysis assessed the diagnostic accuracy and clinical applicability of TBB in breast cancer patients achieving complete clinical response (cCR) post-NACT.
methodsPubMed, Embase, and online clinical trial registries were systematically searched up to April 2025 for studies evaluating TBB in cCR patients after NACT. Pooled sensitivity, specificity and false-negative rate (FNR) were calculated using a random-effects model. Heterogeneity was quantified using the I
resultsEight studies met inclusion criteria. Pooled sensitivity was 0.58 (95% CI 0.51-0.65), specificity was 1.00 (95% CI 0.99-1.00) and the pooled false-negative rate was (42%, 95% CI 35-49%) with I
conclusionIn this meta-analysis limited to patients achieving clinical complete response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy, tumor bed biopsy demonstrated excellent specificity but suboptimal sensitivity with an unacceptably high false-negative rate. These findings indicate that a negative tumor bed biopsy cannot reliably confirm pathological complete response and therefore cannot replace standard surgical excision at present. While tumor bed biopsy may help identify residual disease, its current diagnostic performance does not support its use as a standalone tool for surgical de-escalation, underscoring the need for further refinement and prospective validation before clinical adoption.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41642429What 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.