ArticleESMO real world data and digital oncology2024
Neoadjuvant compared to adjuvant chemotherapy combined with trastuzumab in patients with HER2-positive breast cancer: a register-based cohort study.
Article in ESMO real world data and digital oncology, 2024. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The aim of the study was to compare trastuzumab-based neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) with adjuvant therapy (AT) in a register-based cohort of Swedish patients with primary operable human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive breast cancer. Patients and methods: The Swedish nationwide research database BCBaSe 3.0 was used to identify eligible patients with primary operable HER2-positive breast cancer treated with either NAT or AT between 2008 and 2019. To mitigate confounding by indication bias, propensity score matching (PSM) and inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) were applied. Results: In total, 7258 patients with primary operable HER2-positive breast cancer were identified; 1789 (24.6%) received NAT and 5469 (75.4%), AT. After 1 : 1 PSM, 1258 patients in each therapeutic strategy were available for comparisons. No statistically significant differences between NAT and AT were observed [hazard ratio (HR) for distant disease-free survival 0.97, 95% confidence (CI) 0.72-1.30; HR for breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) 0.69, 95% CI 0.45-1.07; HR for overall (OS) 0.72, 95% CI 0.50-1.05]. In subgroup analysis, NAT resulted in better BCSS (HR 0.44, 95% CI 0.22-0.89) and OS (HR 0.49, 95% CI 0.29-0.90) in patients with clinical node positivity (cN+) at diagnosis. Conclusion: The study shows an equivalence of NAT and AT in terms of prognosis for patients with operable HER2-positive disease whereas a potential benefit of NAT in patients with cN+ is implied. Considering the emerging treatment strategies in the neoadjuvant setting for HER2-positive breast cancer that are not reflected in the study cohort, NAT should be considered as the strategy with a higher possibility of improving long-term prognosis for patients with HER2-positive disease.
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.