ReviewWiener klinische Wochenschrift2026
Austrian treatment algorithms 2025: CDK 4/6 inhibitors in the adjuvant therapy of HR+/HER2- early breast cancer.
Review in Wiener klinische Wochenschrift, 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.
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
Hormone receptor-positive (HR+), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) early breast cancer (eBC) represents the most common breast cancer subtype, with relevant recurrence risks despite optimal endocrine therapy (ET) and locoregional treatment. Long-term data from the Early Breast Cancer Trialists' Collaborative Group (EBCTCG) demonstrate that recurrence risk remains substantial, with outcomes strongly influenced by nodal burden, tumor size, and biological parameters.Advances in systemic therapy, including optimized endocrine strategies, chemotherapy, bone-modifying agents, PARP inhibitors for patients harboring germline BRCA 1/2-mutations, have significantly improved survival, yet recurrence remains a clinically relevant challenge, including for node-negative patients harboring additional biological risk features.The introduction of adjuvant CDK4/6 inhibitors represents an important therapeutic development. Abemaciclib (monarchE) has demonstrated sustained improvements in invasive disease-free survival (IDFS), distant relapse-free survival (DRFS), and a statistically significant overall survival (OS) benefit at 7 years. Ribociclib (NATALEE) demonstrated statistically significant IDFS improvement across a broader clinical risk spectrum, including selected node-negative disease.However, these advances must be considered in the context of distinct toxicity, treatment burden, and substantial additional healthcare system costs. Although emerging evidence supports treatment intensification with CDK4/6 inhibitors in certain settings, uncertainty persists regarding which patient subgroups derive sufficient benefit to justify routine use from both a clinical and health-economic perspective.Further clarification is expected from ongoing randomized studies and real-world evidence, as this paper aims to provide a structured, evidence-based overview of the current standard of knowledge and to support Austrian breast cancer specialists in navigating treatment decisions regarding adjuvant CDK4/6 inhibitor use.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41848905What 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.