ArticleDiscover oncology2026
Evaluating the value of neoadjuvant radiotherapy in patients with breast cancer.
Article in Discover oncology, 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
backgroundThe benefits of preoperative neoadjuvant radiotherapy (NART) for breast cancer are not conclusive and there are no well-established guidelines for NART. We aimed to analyze the difference in survival benefit between NART and postoperative adjuvant radiotherapy (PORT) and screening patients who are suitable for NART.
methodsA retrospective cohort study using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) from 2010 to 2021 was performed. We comprehensively assessed trends in the management of NART in the population during the past decade. The factors associated with NART were then explored using logistic regression. We also compared BC patients with preoperative neoadjuvant radiotherapy (NART) or postoperative adjuvant radiotherapy (PORT) for overall survival (OS) and breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) after propensity score matching (PSM), and attempted to identify precise subgroups of patients that could benefit from NART.
results1785 patients receiving NART were identified from a total of 274,199 patients between 2010 and 2021, with a median follow-up time of around 58 months. NART utilization in higher tumor stages shows a slight upward trend. Based on the multivariate logistic regression model, age more than 50 years old (OR = 0.86; 95% CI 0.78 to 0.94), stage II-III (II: OR = 1.49; 95% CI 1.28 to 1.74 III: OR = 2.44; 95% CI 1.98 to 3.00), T4 (OR = 1.52; 95% CI 1.25 to 1.84), HR-/HER2- (OR = 0.8; 95% CI 0.70 to 0.92) were independently correlated with NART. PORT was significantly associated with better survival (P < 0.001, HR = 0.6709; 95% CI 0.5898-0.7630 for OS) after propensity score matching (PSM). Subgroup analyses showed that for patients of HR-/HER2- subtype, AJCC stage I category or patients receiving breast-conserving surgery (BCS), NART and PORT resulted in similar OS and BCSS. We also identified risk factors for second primary malignancies development after breast cancer and found that NART were related to the lower risk of developing second primary malignancies following breast cancer.
conclusionOver time, an increasing number of breast cancer patients received NART. We cannot affirm that NART is as effective as PORT in the treatment of BC, however we can consider NART as an alternative option in some contexts such as patients of AJCC stage I category and patients receiving BCS, given its potential advantages of reducing second primary malignancies risk.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.