ArticleBritish journal of cancer2026
Insights on postneoadjuvant treatment among patients with triple-negative breast cancer and residual disease after neoadjuvant therapy: can expert consensus help to interpret the current evidence?
Article in British journal of cancer, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
As treatment strategies for early triple-negative breast cancer continue to evolve, translating clinical evidence into practice can be challenging, especially as the standard of care also shifts and may differ across studies. The management of patients with triple-negative breast cancer who have residual disease after neoadjuvant therapy exemplifies a complex clinical scenario with emerging yet sometimes difficult-to-interpret evidence. Through a critical appraisal of current data and an expert consensus discussion from the Nordic region, the authors present a perspective on postneoadjuvant treatment options for triple-negative breast cancer and discuss potential approaches based on available evidence and expert opinion.
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.