ArticleThe breast journal2026
A Five-Year Retrospective Analysis of Neoadjuvant Therapy in Early-Stage Breast Cancer: Subtype Outcomes and Imaging Concordance.
Article in The breast journal, 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
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Although neoadjuvant systemic treatment (NST) is well established in the management of early breast cancer, there are limited clinical data available beyond the highly selected population evaluated in clinical trials. In this study, we assessed real-world outcomes of NST in early breast cancer through a retrospective review of 201 patients treated between November 2019 and February 2025. Pathological complete response (pCR) rates were highest in HER2-positive (60.2%) and triple-negative (53.1%) breast cancer subtypes and lowest in those who were identified as oestrogen receptor-positive (ER-positive)/HER2-negative (11.1%). In HER2-positive disease, pCRs were more frequent in ER-negative (75.8%) than ER-positive (50.0%) cases, while pCR rates in triple-negative breast cancer were similar with and without immunotherapy. Baseline positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) upstaged 37% (35/94) of patients and showed 87% concordance with pathology, whereas magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) demonstrated a false-negative rate of 17% and a false-positive rate of 1.1%. In these cases, MRI results suggested residual disease despite a complete pathological response, with discrepancies varying by tumour subtype. Forty-two percent of the patients underwent chemotherapy dose reductions; 12% required hospitalisation. NST was effective across aggressive subtypes, with pCR rates comparable to those observed in clinical trials. In summary, our results highlighted the contributions of functional imaging with PET/CT and MRI to staging, treatment response assessments and surgical planning in real-world 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.