ArticleFrontiers in oncology2026
Validation of Chinese medicine syndrome differentiation in early breast cancer: a multicenter prospective clinical study.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2026. 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
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Breast cancer is the most common cancer among women. Chinese herbal medicine, which is based on accurate Chinese medicine (CM) syndrome diagnosis, plays a vital role during cancer treatment. This study aimed to validate the established CM syndrome diagnostic criteria for early breast cancer, enhancing their application in clinical settings. Methods: A multicenter prospective clinical study was conducted to collect epidemiological data on CM syndromes. Two attending doctors from the CM breast department performed syndrome differentiation using established diagnostic criteria and compared it to two clinical experts with associate senior professional titles. Metrics such as sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were utilized to assess the validity of the diagnostic test. Results: A total of 641 eligible cases were enrolled from June 2022 to October 2023 from seven hospitals in China. The sensitivity rates for all syndromes ranged from 70.37% to 92.00%, with the highest rate for Spleen and Stomach disharmony in the postoperative stage. Specificity varied from 86.84% to 98.89%, with most criteria exceeding 90%. Overall accuracy of the diagnostic criteria was between 84.25% and 94.45%. Positive predictive values ranged from 72.22% to 98.21%, while negative predictive values spanned from 79.25% to 98.82%, with most syndromes above 80%. The concordance rate for diagnostic criteria ranged from 90.91% to 96.45%, with Kappa values between 0.747 and 0.926. Conclusions: This study demonstrated that the diagnostic criteria exhibit high reliability, confirming the validity of CM syndrome diagnostic criteria among different treatment stages for early breast cancer and contributing to standardizing clinical practice.
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.