You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
| Title |
Prospective comparison of outcome after treatment for triple-negative and non-triple-negative breast cancer
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
The Surgeon, October 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.surge.2016.10.001 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
D.P. Joyce, D. Murphy, A.J. Lowery, C. Curran, K. Barry, C. Malone, R. McLaughlin, M.J. Kerin |
| Abstract |
Triple-negative breast cancers (TNBC) are associated with a poor prognosis owing to an aggressive phenotype. We aimed to carry out a prospective study comparing management strategies and response to therapy in TNBC and non-TNBC patients. Data were obtained from a prospectively maintained database of patients treated for breast cancer. A total of 142 TNBC and 142 age-, stage- and NPI-matched non-TNBC patients were treated. The difference in overall survival between the 2 groups was statistically significant (77% of TNBC patients alive at a mean follow-up of 32 months, versus 92% of non-TNBC patients at a mean follow-up of 38 months, P = 0.0 Log rank test). This survival difference was found to be independent of NPI (P = 0.0 Log rank test). Locoregional recurrence rates were similar between TNBC patients who were treated with wide local excision versus mastectomy (P = 0.449 Log rank test). A significant difference in survival was noted between TNBC patients who responded differentially to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (P = 0.035 Log rank test). Patients with TNBC have adverse outcomes despite aggressive treatment. The development of effective targeted therapies is essential for this breast cancer subtype. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 33 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 33 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 15% |
| Other | 3 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 2 | 6% |
| Unknown | 15 | 45% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 18% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 5 | 15% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 3 | 9% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 6% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 16 | 48% |