ReviewOncology letters2026
Neoadjuvant therapy for stage II-III triple-negative breast cancer: Current evidence, clinical boundaries and emerging strategies (Review).
Review in Oncology letters, 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
Neoadjuvant therapy is the standard therapeutic entry point for the majority of stage II-III triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) cases. However, a number of practical questions remain unresolved in daily care; specifically, it remains unclear how the balance between treatment intensification and toxicity can be maintained, how heterogeneous trial platforms should be interpreted and how biomarkers can be effectively applied without overextending their clinical role. The present review summarizes the currently available evidence on chemotherapy backbones, selective platinum intensification, perioperative immunotherapy, radiotherapy integration, response-adapted strategies, post-neoadjuvant treatment, circulating tumor (ct)DNA-based residual-risk assessment and emerging antibody-drug conjugates. Anthracycline-taxane chemotherapy remains the reference backbone for stage II-III TNBC, whereas platinum is widely regarded as the selective intensifier in chemotherapy-alone platforms. In addition, carboplatin forms part of the evidence-based backbone of a KEYNOTE-522-like chemoimmunotherapy regimen. Among the immunotherapy strategies available, pembrolizumab-based perioperative treatment has the most convincing evidence in terms of pathological complete response, event-free survival and overall survival. Various biomarkers, such as programmed death-ligand 1, stromal tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes, homologous recombination deficiency, residual cancer burden and ctDNA, can improve biological and prognostic resolution. However, to the best of our knowledge few have been validated as stand-alone treatment selectors. Therefore, future management protocols should remain evidence-based, response-aware and explicit regarding the boundary between established practice and investigational escalation.
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.