ArticleJournal of patient experience2026
A Patient-Led Survey of Antibody Drug Conjugate Usage and Dosing for People Living With Metastatic Breast Cancer.
Article in Journal of patient experience, 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.
- Patient Experiences With Antibody-Drug Conjugates: Bridging Efficacy and Quality of Life in Metastatic Breast Cancer Care.Journal of patient experience · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Scientific advancements have led to more people living longer with metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) offer a promising treatment option, but currently approved ADCs are associated with significant side effects that can impact quality of life. Dose reductions may help mitigate these effects, yet little is known about real-world, patient-reported experiences with ADC dosing. We surveyed 170 individuals with MBC who had received ADC treatment to assess initial dosing, dose modifications, and barriers to supportive care. Most respondents (94.1%) began treatment with the recommended dosing frequency and 82.9% with the recommended dose. However, 35.3% reported dose reductions, primarily due to experienced or anticipated side effects. Open-ended responses underscored the burden of side effects: "If not for low dose, I don't think I could go on." Most participants (81.0%) reported oncologist-led efforts to manage side effects, and 73.0% used medications for symptom control. Financial barriers were common, with 43.5% reporting difficulty accessing supportive care. These findings highlight the need for patient-centered dosing strategies and improved access to supportive care.
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.