ArticleGland surgery2026
Comparison of neoadjuvant TCbHP versus THP in HER2-positive breast cancer: a retrospective cohort study.
Article in Gland surgery, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Although the Chinese Society of Clinical Oncology (CSCO) guidelines list both the TCbHP regimen (taxane + carboplatin + trastuzumab + pertuzumab) and the carboplatin-sparing THP regimen (taxane + trastuzumab + pertuzumab) as category I neoadjuvant recommendations for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive breast cancer, TCbHP carries a significantly higher toxicity burden, and current guidelines do not clearly define which patients can safely omit platinum. Accordingly, this study aims to compare the efficacy and long-term outcomes of neoadjuvant TCbHP versus THP in HER2-positive breast cancer and to preliminarily identify patients who may safely forgo carboplatin. Methods: This retrospective cohort study included patients with HER2-positive breast cancer who received neoadjuvant TCbHP or THP at Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital between January 2019 and December 2022. Inclusion criteria were age 18 years, clinical stage II-III disease, completion of six cycles of neoadjuvant therapy (NAT), and no prior anticancer treatment or distant metastasis at diagnosis. Baseline clinicopathological characteristics were extracted from electronic medical records. The primary endpoint was pathological complete response (pCR). Secondary endpoints were event-free survival (EFS) and disease-free survival (DFS). Follow-up was conducted via outpatient records and telephone interviews, with data censored on June 30, 2025. Results: Of 427 screened patients, 148 matched pairs were generated by 1:1 propensity score matching using age, menopausal status, clinical T stage, lymph node status, HR status, HER2 status, Ki-67 and taxane. There was no significant difference in pCR rates between TCbHP and THP (53.4% Conclusions: No significant difference in efficacy or 3-year EFS was observed between TCbHP and THP. Exploratory subgroup analyses showed that TCbHP achieved a higher pCR rate than THP in patients aged ≤60 years, premenopausal patients, and those with Ki‑67 >30%. Furthermore, interaction tests suggested that patients with Ki‑67 >30% derived a greater benefit from the TCbHP regimen compared with those with Ki‑67 ≤30%.
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.