↓ Skip to main content

Taxanes for adjuvant treatment of early breast cancer

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2007
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
111 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
96 Mendeley
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.
Title
Taxanes for adjuvant treatment of early breast cancer
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2007
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd004421.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Thomas Ferguson, Nicholas Wilcken, Rosemary Vagg, Davina Ghersi, Anna K Nowak

Abstract

Adjuvant chemotherapy improves survival in pre- and post-menopausal women with early breast cancer. Taxanes are highly active chemotherapy agents in metastatic breast cancer. Their role in early breast cancer was examined in this review. To review the randomised evidence comparing taxane containing chemotherapy regimens with non-taxane containing chemotherapy regimens as adjuvant treatment of pre- or post-menopausal women with early breast cancer. The Cochrane Breast Cancer Group Specialised Register was searched on 9th January 2007 using the codes for 'early breast cancer' and keywords for taxanes. Details of the search strategy used to create the register are described in the Group's module in The Cochrane Library. The reference lists of other related literature reviews and articles were also searched. Randomised trials comparing taxane containing regimens with non-taxane containing regimens in women with operable breast cancer. Women receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy were excluded. Data were collected from published trials and abstracts. Studies were assessed for eligibility and quality and the data extracted independently by two review authors. Hazard ratios (HR) were derived for time-to-event outcomes, and meta-analysis was performed using a fixed-effect model. The primary outcome measure was overall survival (OS); disease-free survival (DFS) was a secondary outcome measure. Toxicity and quality of life data were extracted when reported. We identified 20 studies, 12 of these (7 full publications, 5 abstracts) had sufficient data published for inclusion (11 for OS and 11 for DFS) in the review. The weighted average median follow up was 60.4 months. All studies fulfilled quality criteria either adequately or well. Amongst 18,304 women with 2483 deaths, the HR for OS was 0.81 (95% CI 0.75 to 0.88, P < 0.00001) favouring taxane containing regimens. Amongst 19,943 women with 4800 events, the HR for DFS was 0.81 (95% CI 0.77 to 0.86, P < 0.00001) favouring taxane containing regimens. There was no statistical heterogeneity for either OS or DFS. This meta-analysis of studies supports the use of taxane containing adjuvant chemotherapy regimens with improvement of overall survival and disease-free survival for women with operable early breast cancer. The review did not identify a subgroup of patients where taxane containing treatment may have been more or less effective. Dosage and scheduling of the taxane drug is not clearly defined and we await results of the next generation of studies to determine the optimal use of taxanes in early breast cancer.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 96 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 2 2%
Spain 1 1%
Portugal 1 1%
United Kingdom 1 1%
Unknown 91 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 17 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 16%
Student > Doctoral Student 13 14%
Researcher 12 13%
Student > Postgraduate 5 5%
Other 19 20%
Unknown 15 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 44 46%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 12 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 6%
Psychology 4 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 3%
Other 12 13%
Unknown 15 16%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 18 July 2018.
All research outputs
#3,592,092
of 14,177,370 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#6,317
of 10,873 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#34,758
of 146,550 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#60
of 105 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,177,370 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,873 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.6. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 146,550 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 105 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.