ArticleCancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.)2026
N
Article in Cancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.), 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundOncologists lack effective point-of-care biomarkers to rapidly adapt curative-intent triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) neoadjuvant therapy (NT). Previous work reveals that N
aimsThis pilot study examined NOHA's potential as a marker of both TNBC disease presence and treatment exposure to curative intent TNBC NT, including evaluation of the relationship between longitudinal NOHA normalization and measures of pathologic response. METHODS AND
resultsNOHA concentration was assessed pre-NT and then longitudinally at five timepoints, including pre- and post-operatively, among 31 TNBC patients undergoing definitive surgery following receipt of NT. NOHA concentrations were low pre-NT and increased progressively toward healthy control levels during and after neoadjuvant therapy and post-operatively in all patients, yet showed no difference comparing those achieving pathologic complete response versus pathologic partial response or stable disease. Levels did not vary based on receipt of pembrolizumab, clinical characteristics, or presence of non-cancer comorbidities.
conclusionThese findings support NOHA's potential as a marker of disease presence and treatment exposure rather than differential response. Larger validation studies are needed to determine whether serial levels can be used to optimize treatment decision-making or improve outcomes in high-risk populations.
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.